A64635:241
Certain discourses, viz. of Babylon (Rev. 18. 4.) being the present See of Rome…
Certain discourses, viz. of Babylon (Rev. 18. 4.) being the present See of Rome (with a sermon of Bishop Beadles upon the same words) of laying on of hands (Heb. 6. 2.) to be an ordained ministry, of the old form of words in ordination, of a set form of prayer : each being the judgment of the late Arch-bishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland / published and enlarged by Nicholas Bernard ... : unto which is added a character of Bishop Bedel, and an answer to Mr. Pierces fifth letter concerning the late Primate.Certain discourses, viz. of Babylon (Rev. 18. 4.) being the present See of Rome (with a sermon of Bishop Bedels upon the same words) of laying on of hands (Heb. 6. 2.) to be an ordained ministry, of the old form of words in ordination, of a set form of prayer : each being the judgment of the late Arch-bishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland / published and enlarged by Nicholas Bernard ... : unto which is added a character of Bishop Bedel, and an answer to Mr. Pierces fifth letter concerning the late Primate.
London: printed for John Crook, 1659
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.
2. Suppose we received our ordination from such who were corrupted with Popish errors, yet if they retained the Fundamentals of Christian Religion, their ordination may be valid: those like some part of the bark of the tree uncut, may convey ⟨p. 225⟩the Sap from the root to the preserving of life in the branches. What Saint Augustine saith of the Donatists in some things, mecum sunt, they concurre with me; in other things they are defiled, may be applicable to the Church of Rome, and if so, why may we not receive through them, what was of Christs remaining in them, without being defiled with that corrupt part which is their own? why may not there be in this a separation of the precious from the vile? And in our reformation we withdrew our selves no further from her, then she hath declined from her self in the Apostles time, and from the ancient state and condition of it then, as one saith well, Nostra Ecclesia ab hodierna Romana Ecclesia contaminata recessit, ut ad ⟨p. 226⟩pristinam, puram, Apostolicam, Romanam accedere posset. We forsook the present corrupted Church of Rome, that we might be nearer a kin to the first, pure, Apostolical Roman Church in the primitive times.
2. Suppose we received our ordination from such who were corrupted with Popish errours, yet if they retained the Fundamentalls of Christian Religion, their ordination may be valid: those like some part of the barke of the tree uncut, may convey ⟨p. 225⟩the Sappe from the root to the preserving of life in the branches. What Saint Augustine saith of the Donatists in some things, mecum sunt, they concurre with me; in other things they are defiled, may be applicable to the Church of Rome, and if so, why may we not receive through them, what was of Christs remaining in them, without being defiled with that corrupt part which is their own? why may not there be in this a separation of the precicious from the vile? And in our reformation we withdrew our selves no further from her, then she hath declined from her self in the Apostles time, and from the ancient state and condition of it then, as one saith well, Nostra Ecclesia ab hodierna Romana Ecclesia contaminata recessit, ut ad ⟨p. 226⟩