Baxter - Houston-Packer Collection BX5151 .B3 1659

(92) Eucharifl. Why was this , butbecaufe they had not many places to celebratein ? and u aiers this were fo, whence came it elfe, that a Schirmarical BiJhop was faidconfiituere: or collocare ali- ud Altare ? and that a Bifhopand an Altarare made correlatives? See S. Cyprian Epift. 4o. 72., 73. de unit. Ecclef. And tbus perhaps is Ignatius to be anderfiood in that ftrequotedpafaáe of he 'Ev @voi ecip:ov Unum Altare omni Ecclefix, & unus Epifco- pus cum Presbyterio&Diaconis So far Mr. Mead. I hope upon the confent offo admirable 8 Critick and learned man,it will not be fo much blame -worthy inme,if I (peak fome- what.the moreconfidently this way ; and fay, that I think that the mainconfufion and Tyranny that hath overfpread the Chun- ches,hath been very much from the changing the Apoffolical frameof Churches, and letting up many Altars and Congre- gations under one . Bithop in one ( pretended particular ) Church. I had threeor four patï'ages ready tocite out of _Ignatius , but thefe are fo exprefs that I apprehend there[} the lefs neceffary to be mentioned. The next therefore that I shall mention fuall'be the forementi- oned words ofMin Marty Apol. 2, cited by Mr. Mead, and byothers frequentlyto this purpofe : In which t obferve all thrfe . particulars full to the purpofe. 2. That theyhad but one Affembly each Lords day for Church communion for one Church. 2. That this was for reading and prayer and theEucha- rifL.3.That the Prefìdent(who is commonly by thofe ofthe Epif- ,copal judgement faid tobe here meant the Bithop) did preach and give thanks and adminifier the fupper : fo that it was ad- mini[}red but toone Congregation as under that B ifhop of that Church, for he could not be in two places at once. 4. That to ethçe Abfent theDeacons carried their portion after the confe- cration..: fo that they hadnot another Meetingand Congregati- onby themfelves for that end. This is all fo plain that I fhall think it needethno Vindication. So that were there but theee two Teflimonies, I ;íhould not marvail if Bithop Downam had extended his confeffion a little further , when heacknowledgeth (Def li. 2. cap. 6. page i off.. that [ At the firs and namely in the time ofthe Apoflle Paul,the moßofthe Churchesfofoonafter ,their Converfion, did not each of them exiled the proportion of a populous