( 3 ) and their affirmations that Apoftles were Bithops of theChttr- ches. For Paflors they were : but fo that they had no peculi- ar Diocefs but Hill went on in planting andgathering andcon- firming Churches: Whereas the Bithops that were felled by them ( and are laid to fucceed them had) their fingle Churches which were their peculiar charge; They had but one fuch charge or Church,when the Apoffles that lead in the Catalogueshadma ny; &yet none fo as to be limited to them. And why have we not the Diocefs of Paul and 7ohn,and LA/whew and Thomas,and the raft ofthe twelve,mentioned, as well of Peter and ?antes? Or if Paul had any,it feems he was compartner with Peter in the fam e City (contrary to the Canons that requireth that therebe but one Bithop in a City. ) Set. r6. Its clear then that the Englith Bifhops were not fuchApollolical unfixed Bithops as the [tinerantaofthe firfI age were. And yet if they were, I thall thew in the next Argument that its nothing to their advantage; becaufe Archbifhops are nothing to our quellion. And that they were not fuch as the fixed Bifhops of Scripture times,! am next to prove. Set. 17. The fixed Bithops in the Scripture times had but a fingle Congregation or particular Church for their Paftoral Charge : But our Englith Bifhops had many (if not many hundred) fuch Churches for their charge : thereforeour Englifh Bifhope were not of the fame fort with thofe in Scripture. The Major I have proved in the former Difputation. The Mi- nor needs no proof, as being known to all that know En gland. W Set. 18. And 2.The fixed Bifhops in the Scripture times had no Presbyters at leaf}, of other particular Churches under them , (. They Governed not any Presbyters that had other affociated Congregations for publick Worfhip.) But theEn- glifh Bithops had the Presbyters ofother Churches under them ( perhaps ofhundreds : ) therefore they are not fuch as the Scripture Bifhops were. There is much difference between a Governour of People,and a Governour of Pafl'ors; Epifiopui gregis, &Epifcepus Epifcoporum,is not all one.None ofus faith, Cypriot; in Concil. Carthagin. calleth himlelf, or takes him fell to be Epifcopum Epifcoporum. No fixed Bithops in Scripture times were the Pallors of?aft ors, as leas}, ofother Churches. nr%
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=