[ 286 J And it's worth the noting which he adds [''And '' therefore I, for my part, am fo little folicitom for " any confetjuence that may be hence inferred to the '',prejr-tdice of my Caufe, tU that 1 am apt to think "that thu muft have been the way at firft in the "making of Bijhops, how Abfolute foever 1 conceive '~ them to have been when they were once made.-:.. .An f. Are we not beholden to the .Univerfal Prefidentfi1ip for this conceffion ? I forced John– (on, alitU Terret. to the fame: And yet both thefe men cry down a Power refulting from God's Law or Charter to the perfon duly receptive, when yet the Infiance of the Papacy confiraineth them · to make it their foundation. Why then mufi Presbyterian Ordination be ,Nullity, if Inferiors pnly ~hufe and Confecrate the Pope, and Presby– ·, ters qnly at fidl: chofe and Confecrated Bilhops? Obj. The difference u, that {uch Inferiors are bHt Eleilors and lnve(fing Minifters, and not Donors Gj the Power, b11,t Popes and Prelates are Donors. . A;nf. 1. Then no Prelate could be fuch but by . th~ Popes or Councils donation. z. Doth not Mr. D. oft fay, that the Body is the feat of P<;nver, and fo giveth it ? 3. But why fhould he think that we mufi take his word for this difference and the Prelatical Donation infiead ofMinifiry ? Do not the Papifis themfelves more commonly hold that the Presbyters ( or Priefis ) Office is of fixed Divine Iufiitution, and more unalterable, than that the Bifhops is ? The latter is difputed ; the former undifputable. ( le may be Mr. D. will thus prove that he is no Papift : But I had rather .he be one than worfe.) · Nay, what will you fay "if afcet all he be half an Ind~pendent ~ - - - ,. • P. 523~ .,_ • I
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=