Baxter - BX5207 B3 A2 1696

Numb. iV, 11 `P P E N D r X 99 Stream of your Thoughts, run all that way, and yòu ftudied more what was for you, than what was againft you : andnow the Senfe of your Error path turned your Thoughts the contrary way, I may judge by the Efteets, that you think ' more what may.be laid againft Nonconformity than what may be faid for ít. 2. And Experiencemakes me take it for granted, that tò judge haffily before they fatly underftand or hear the Caufe, is the common Difeafe of Man's depraved In- ' telleet, which few are cured of in any great Degree. I would not be guilty of it while I blame it, if my Frailty can avoid ir, and therefore I wig fitppofè that ` you have more Reafont for what you fay, that I yet underftand, and fhall only ` as a Learner, delire you to helpme to underftand chem. And r. Seeing almolt all your Book is againft Anabaptifdryand Separation, I de- f fire you to acquaint, me why you entituled it, An Addrefs to the Noncanformifd, ? when it is certain-that the ignorant Multitude, whohave force fuch Thoughts al. ready,will hencebe more perfuaded that the Nonconformills are commonly for Se- ` paration;which beingaCalumny,I fuppofe you thus indireetly propagare it forfome ` Reafon which I know not. Falfhood and Hatred are fo befriended by common ` corrupted Nature, that they need no Books tobe written to encourage them. If `a Philofopher wrote againff Manicbeifm and called it An Addref to the Chrifíian,; 'Or a Papift wrote againft Anabapditry. and Separation; and called itAn Addrefs to the Próteftantr, the Intimation were unjuft. e z. Will hoe the Cdnformilts think that ybu prevaricate, in pretending ' to plead for a National Church, p. nor. and when you explain your felf fpeak but ' bf a [Church Inorganical] that is equivocally and ineptly focalled: fèeing forma de. ' nominat, and the WordChurch in the common ConrroVerfy about [Natsosiäl Pro- , uinciál, Diocefan Churches] is taken for an Ecclefiaftical Polity and Soèiety, and ' not for a meer Community t A Family without a Matter, a School without a Schoohnafter, a Kingdom without a King, and a Church without a Paftoral Re. ` giment, are equivocal improper Dénominations a materiâ ; when you knew that the Nonconformifls have long asked which is the true conftitutive Ecclefiaftical ` Héad of this National Church ? Whenyou were upon theSubjesi it would have done well to have told them ; for an accidental. Head (the King) they confefs as muchas others. Qar(t. ;. When you plead fo much for Parilh-Churches, are yòu therein a Non'. contormiltt, and is your Addrefs to your felf? or do you take the Word [Cburcb] ' there alto equivocally and imprpperly ? If fo, you Ihould have faid fo. The Pre- ` latifts grant with Cyprian, that ubi Epifcopus ibi Eclefa ; and with Ignatius, that to, 'every church there is one Bifhopwith his Presbyters, &e. No King, noKingdom; ` no Matter, no School nor Family; no Bifhop, no Church t Therefore the Pre- ' latifts hold that we have no true proper Church below a Diocefan, and That Pk. riffles are not Churches but Chappels, or parts of a Church, and this is not the ` leaf part of our Nonconformity, who hold that Parifhes are, or Mould be true Churches, and not only parts of a Church in fini ardiaia, without any proper Bi- fhop. Tell me better I pray, which fide you here intend to take. Quefd. q. Seeing p. o r r. 6.c. you very well plead for the Power of Kings In Determination of Parifh-Bounds, and Church Orders, as under the Jewilh Po- lity, and the new way of the Conformity is fo far contrary, as that they hold that if a Bishop command one Time, one Place, one Tranflatiön, Metre, Cere- mony, Uten61, etc. and the King another ; that the Bifhop is to be obeyed be- ' fore the King, becaufe it belongs not to him, but to the Church. Is it the New Conformity in this that'youare for, or for the old, and the Nonconformifts who in this Agree. V24. I. Some Words p. rz¢, cay. move nie to ask you, whetherfuch Anabap- 'tfl, as you formerly taught and joined with, or the ignorant irreligious vulgar, as you then accounted there, were the better People ? If the Religion -of them that mind little of God or.Life Eternal, further thanto join with the Church, be the true State of Regeneration and Holinefs, were it notmore worth your Labour to writea Bookagainft that whichnow we take for Holinefs (feeking firfi Cod's King- ' don andRighteoufnef}: But ifother Wife and Pious Sectaries be better than in,- ' pious Churchmen, were thole times is much better than theft is you defcribe them, inwhich there Was not one counted Religious (e. g. from izç, till 1637.) for Three that, I fay not for Ten or Twenty, that are how in tnoft places that iÉ ` have known. ` Quefd. 6. And I add, bath hot Scotland kept out Seas without oarConformity¡ more effesuually thanConformity here kept them out N z' f4'4,

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=