[ 17) ] Reformed Churches ; hut_rather that really they contradiCted him nOt, becaufe they thought as he : And yet I was loth to think them fo uncharittable as to put alf Minifiers to declare fuch a thing to be in the Word of God,' and never tell them where tO find it. Between both what to think I know not: Eut if really Dr. G. \vas the Church, the reverence ·of his Name [ Ch1trch] !hall never make me add to the Word of God, or corrupt his Ordinance ; nor fubfcribe to his ' Book, or toaForeign Jurifdiction, if .he Father it on the Church. ' ' - The main firength ofall his condemnations of us, and j1,1fiifications of himfelf is, . that, They are the Church, and our fawful Rulers , and- we mttft · obey, and be Sworn neper to endeavour any alteration ofChurch Government, (not excepting Church de– population by large Diocefes, nor the ufe of the Keys by Lay Chancellors. And if you ask for the proof of all this, and that they are not Vfor- . pers nor Church-deftroyers, nor Subverters of Epifco~ pacy it felf, nor grand Schifmaticks; you mull be content with, ~~~ Ipfo dixit, and 2 . Epifcop~tcy is ancient. 3· .And the people have neither an EleCfing ,or necejfary Confenting Vote; and yet when not on- , lyMr. Clerkfon and I, but alfo Dr. Burnet have fully proved .that for twelve hundred or thirteen hundred years the peoples Confent was requifite, thefe great dependents on Antiquity and the Church , can walh all off' with a torrent of words. If toe Letters in the Caballa ~nd other Hi~ · fiory 'be credible, how great a hand had G. DukeofB1tckjngham inmaking the C.hurchof Eng– land in his days ? Read but what Hcylin faith of BifilO};) •
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=