One was, "Because that may be a sin _per accidens_, which is not so in
itself, and may be unlawfully commanded, though that accident be
not in the command." Another was, "That it may be commanded under an
unjust penalty."
Again this proposition being brought by the Conformists, "That command
which commandeth an act in itself lawful, and no other act whereby
any unjust penalty is enjoined, nor any circumstance whence, _per
accidens_, any sin is consequent which the commander ought to provide
against, is not sinful."
[Sidenote: His contentions or denials]
Mr. Baxter denied it for this reason, then given in with his own
hand in writing thus: "Because the first act commanded may be _per
accidens_ unlawful, and be commanded by an unjust penalty, though no
other act or circumstance commanded be such."
Again, this proposition being brought by the Conformists, "That
command which commandeth an act in itself lawful, and no other act
whereby any unjust penalty is enjoined, nor any circumstance,
whence directly, or _per accidens_, any sin is consequent, which the
commander ought to provide against, hath in it all things requisite
to the lawfulness of a command, and particularly cannot be guilty of
commanding an act _per accidens_ unlawful, nor of commanding an act
under an unjust penalty."
Mr. Baxter denied it upon the same reasons.
PETER GUNNING.[27]
JOHN PEARSON.[28]
These were then two of the disputants, still alive, and will attest
this; one being now Lord Bishop of Ely, and the other of Chester.
And the last of them told me very lately, that one of the
Dissenters--which I could, but forbear to name--appeared to Dr.
Sanderson to be so bold, so troublesome, and so illogical in the
dispute, as forced patient Dr. Sanderson--who was then Bishop of
Lincoln, and a moderator with other Bishops--to say, with an unusual
earnestness, "That he had never met with a man of more pertinacious
confidence, and less abilities, in all his conversation."
[Sidenote: Results of the debate]
But though this debate at the Savoy was ended without any great
satisfaction to either party, yet both parties knew the desires, and
understood the abilities, of the other, much better than before it:
and the late distressed Clergy, that were now restored to their former
rights and power, did, at the next meeting in Convocation, contrive to
give the dissenting party satisfaction by alteration, explanation, and
addition to some part both of the Rubric and Common Prayer, as also
by adding some new necessary Collects, and a particular Collect
of Thanksgiving. How many of those new Collects were worded by Dr.
Sanderson, I cannot say; but am sure the whole Convocation valued him
so much that he never undertook to speak to any point in question, but
he was heard with great willingness and attention; and when any point
in question was determined, the Convocation did usually desire him to
word their intentions, and as usually approve and thank him.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account