A95762:407
The judgement of the late Arch-bishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland. Of Babylon…
The judgement of the late Arch-bishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland. 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. / Published and enlarged by Nicholas Bernard D.D. and preacher to the Honourable Society of Gray's-Inn, London. Unto which is added a character of Bishop Bedel, and an answer to Mr. Pierces fifth letter concerning the late primate.The judgement of the late Arch-bishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland. 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 ministery. Of the old form of words in ordination. Of a set form of prayer. / Published and enlarged by Nicholas Bernard D.D. and preacher to the Honourable Society of Grayes-Inne, London. 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.
But secondly, I do not believe the Primate meant, or approved those works of Doctor Jacksons, wherein he professeth himself to be for the Arminian way, as he doth in the Epistle Dedicatory of those Books which he dedicated to the Earle of Pembroke, and which were answered by Doctor Twice. Other works it may be, that learned man might have of other subjects, which might be useful to posterity, which the Primate might have a care of, but I do not believe they were any of that nature; and the rather because they must be meant of such works which were not extant at his death, and not of those which were already printed, as you seem to apply it. Besides, it ⟨p. 373⟩doth not appear, the Primate then understood what subjects they were of; And therefore, that which you have immediately added of your own; viz. That such inestimable [Greek or Hebrew] might not be wanting to posterity, but might perform their work of bringing religion into its wits, (which the Reader might possibly mistake, in apprehending them to have been the Primates words) and your somewhat severe application to him, from thence, and what Mr. Barlee had said of Doctor Jackson, seems to want a foundation here. For that which you write in your Postscript concerning my saying, that the doctrine of St. Augustine was confirmed, or inclined unto by the Primate in his works, if you observe the whole discourse, ⟨p. 347⟩it is only in relation to Pelagius and his disciples, and limited to those points in debate concerning the Primates judgement, whereof universal redemption and free will, were mentioned; not that by it I had obliged the Primate to be of Saint Augustine's judgement in all points besides: And for that particular of perseverance, which you instance in, it came not into my discourse in either of my Letters to Mr. Barlee, what he or Mr. Baxter have produced of the Primates apprehension; what was Saint Augustine's judgement in that point, cannot argue it was therefore his own; Indeed, Saint Augustine is variously conceived in it, in his several Tractates, and where he hath some expressions tending to ⟨p. 375⟩the final falling away of some who have been regenerated and justified; he is thus salved by others, who understand him either, de justificatis Sacramento tenus, or judicio charitatis, that they were such, or of some predispositions to regeneration, in some Moral reformation;