Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression of Mr. G. Kendall whereunto is added animadversions on a late dissertation of Ludiomæus Colvinus, aliaà Ludovicus Molinæs̳, M. Dr. Oxon, and an admonition of Mr. W. Eyre of Salisbury : with Mr. Crandon's Anatomy for satisfaction of Mr. Caryl.

About this Item

Title: Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression of Mr. G. Kendall whereunto is added animadversions on a late dissertation of Ludiomæus Colvinus, aliaà Ludovicus Molinæs̳, M. Dr. Oxon, and an admonition of Mr. W. Eyre of Salisbury : with Mr. Crandon's Anatomy for satisfaction of Mr. Caryl.
Author: Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.
Publication: London :: Printed by A.M. for Thomas Underhill ... and Francis Tyton ...,; 1654.
Rights/Permissions: To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
Subject terms: Church of England -- Apologetic works.; Lord's Supper -- Church of England.; Theology, Doctrinal.
Cite this Item: "Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression of Mr. G. Kendall whereunto is added animadversions on a late dissertation of Ludiomæus Colvinus, aliaà Ludovicus Molinæs̳, M. Dr. Oxon, and an admonition of Mr. W. Eyre of Salisbury : with Mr. Crandon's Anatomy for satisfaction of Mr. Caryl." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A26864.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed May 4, 2024.

Pages

§. 89.

R. B. I Will not say it is past the wit of man to finde the Ground of this charge, i. e. to see how this should follow; but I dare say, it is past my wit. If it had been said, The Covenant commandeth perfection and not since∣rity; Or The Covenant Accepteth sincerity, but not Commandeth it, there had been some reason for this charge. But do you think that sincerity is no part of Per∣fection! Can the Covenant require perfection, and not require sincerity, when sincerity is contained in perfection? If you take sincerity, exclusivè only, as ex∣cluding perfection, and not at all formaliter; then its true that it is not comman∣ded, nor is a duty, but a failing: For I hope the Gospel doth not command Im∣perfection, but tender us a Remedy for it. You might with more colour have argued, that then Repentance is no Duty, because inconsistent with commanded perfe∣ction. But that will not hold neither: For they suppose, Repentance com∣manded by the same Law, in case (and upon certain supposal) of Imperfe∣ction, or sin.