London edition; supplied file is a title-page fragment only
A Defence of the Way to the True Church against A. D. His Reply
Wherein the Motives Leading to Papistry, and Questions Touching the Rule of Faith, the Authority of the Church, the Succession of the Truth, and the Beginning of Romish Innovations, Are Handled and Fully Disputed
John White · 1614
London: Printed by Richard Field for William Barret, dwelling in Paul's Church-yard at the sign of the Three Pigeons, 1614.
Overview
John White's Reformed polemical response to A. D. addresses motives toward Roman Catholicism, the rule of faith, the authority of the church, succession of truth, and the origin of Roman innovations. The supplied file is only a title-page fragment; the overview relies on the full title and verified catalog descriptions rather than an examination of the complete text.
Overview
John White's Reformed polemical response to A. D. addresses motives toward Roman Catholicism, the rule of faith, the authority of the church, succession of truth, and the origin of Roman innovations. The supplied file is only a title-page fragment; the overview relies on the full title and verified catalog descriptions rather than an examination of the complete text.
Editorial Evaluation
Purpose Fulfillment
Does the work accomplish what it claims to accomplish?
The full editorial rationale has not yet been entered.
Editorial Evaluation
Source Quality
Does it use the appropriate primary and secondary sources?
The full editorial rationale has not yet been entered.
Editorial Evaluation
Citation Accuracy
Are quotations, references, and claims verifiable and in context?
The full editorial rationale has not yet been entered.
Editorial Evaluation
Evidence Coverage
Does it address the relevant evidence, including contrary evidence?
The full editorial rationale has not yet been entered.
Editorial Evaluation
Historical Accuracy
Are people, dates, editions, events, and settings handled correctly?
The full editorial rationale has not yet been entered.
Editorial Evaluation
Subject Competence
Does the author demonstrate competence in the relevant disciplines?
The full editorial rationale has not yet been entered.
Editorial Evaluation
Logical Coherence
Do the conclusions follow from the premises and evidence?
The full editorial rationale has not yet been entered.
Editorial Evaluation
Methodological Transparency
Are the method and controlling assumptions identifiable and consistent?
The full editorial rationale has not yet been entered.
Editorial Evaluation
Strongest-Form Engagement
Does the work address the strongest opposing case rather than a caricature?
The full editorial rationale has not yet been entered.
Editorial Evaluation
Clarity and Research Usefulness
Is it intelligible, navigable, and useful for further study?
The full editorial rationale has not yet been entered.