A78005:19
A vindication of Mr Burroughs, against Mr Edwards his foul aspersions, in his spreading…A vindication of Mr Burroughes, against Mr Edwards his foule aspersions, in his spreading…
A vindication of Mr Burroughs, against Mr Edwards his foul aspersions, in his spreading Gangræna, and his angry Antiapologia. Concluding with a brief declaration what the Independents would have. / By Jer: Burroughs.A vindication of Mr Burroughes, against Mr Edwards his foule aspersions, in his spreading Gangræna, and his angry Antiapologia. Concluding with a briefe declaration what the Independents would have. / By Jer: Burroughes.
London: printed for H. Overton, 1646
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.
First this. I say the story of Nicols and such a meeting mentioned pag. 79. is all false. No, says he, some part is true. The first part wherein is laid down Nicols his maintaining to M. Greenhils face those opinions; How then came M. Burroughs his affirming that story M. Edwards hath of one Nicols to be false, be in any sense justified to be true?
First this. I say the story of Nicols and such a meeting mentioned pag. 79. is all false. No, sayes he, some part is true. The first part wherin is laid down Nicols his maintaining to M. Greenhils face those opinions; How then came M. Burroughes his affirming that story M. Edwards hath of one Nicols to be false, be in any sense justified to be true?
Ans. See the sagacity of the man: Take heed what you say ⟨p. 6⟩against M. Edwards, he is cunning, he will find you out. But M. Edwards, look back again to what I affirm in that testimony under my hand, you shall find, I only say this, that all the story about Nicols in such a page, namely pag. 79. is false, now to prove me a liar you tell the world that a part of the story in another pag. namely pag. 78. is true, is this a good argument to prove a man a liar, who says the story in one pag. of a book is false? But he lies, because the story of another page of the book is true? What brave stuff is here to prove a lye? I profess to all the world, as in the presence of God, I do not now invent this to help to salve the business, but what ever failing might be in the expression, the reason of my mentioning the page, was to limit my testimony to what was in that page concerning Nicols; what was in that meeting there mentioned in reference to him, I took not upon me to deny what might be between M. Greenhill and Nicols at some other time; and all that M. Greenhill denies in my testimony is that part of the story of Nicols, in reference to that meeting there mentioned. He need not rub his memory to call to mind any other time that Nicols had been with him; for where did he ever deny any such thing? There is nothing mentioned about it in any thing I wrote to M. John Goodwin.