~ , ·" c· ~ , . REader, The}3i~1op's repetiti?n in Cqnference _ (before and wlth Dr. Bevendge and Dr. Say– well ) occaGoned my over-tediot,ls Repetitions ; But,you may per~eive th~y- have not been wholly . in v~in, vvhile at the lafi the Bi01op was forced, , I. 1 o deny Canons to be Laws: And rhen what ~s d1eir Chqrches LegiQative Power~ andhow can we obey a ~aw that is no Law? And why are we called to Swear Canonical Obedience? or :wh~ are we called S~hifmaticks for not obeying· ;h~m ? And if they might be called Laws to their .proper Subje~s, can Ufurping Foreigners the~~,. fore make us Laws? · -· _ JI, H~ is~ put to difown the Namesof Vniverfai Sov~r~#gnty, and Summa Potefta, but only as Invi~ dious, that is, as openin~ that which they would hide by oth(tr Names fitted ~o deceive: And ye£ maintaineth rhe thing, and calls them ReElors and Vniverfal (Jovernors: As if1mreg~ndi in Supre.1m f.tettors were not the fame thing., and that ,whicl~ he. knew we were to difpu~e. - · ' tii; When he h~th oft pleaded for Obedience ~o ~he Vn~verfl:l qh~rch a!Jd i_cs L~ws, and made ~aw-makmg ·Its work , he IS fam at_lafi to re~. ouce it aimofl: to Sentence and Execuuon. And ~n his -many inllances of fuch 'Judging ·rowers to name nm one tha~ reguireth an Univerfa~ Human J d . ' . . ' .- - u ge. ·· IV. fie was ~ngryat the Argument fet~ht from , the incapacity ofan Univerfal 'Kingor Civil Se– pare; 13uc' why? Only~ as invidious ? that is, As detetting their Error; And faith , that it intima– teth tha.t they claim a .Kingly forcing Power , ·,., • · · . whereas .i
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=