Background Image
Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  687 / 846 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 687 / 846 Next Page
Page Background

Numb.

I.

APPENDIX.

that do otherwife.

4. We have

no

Bithop

in our

Diocefs.

S.

We read Canons

that null Bilhops Ordination out

of

their

Dioceffes. 6. We

know not

of

above

two

Bithops

in

England,

nor whereto

find

the

reff

that

are latent, and we hear

thofe

two

will

not

ordain.

7.

Divers

of

them were juftly

ejeóted for

defiroying

the Church, and we

cannot

take them for

Bilhops.

S.

We are hut

Subjeóts and

á

fmall

part

of

the Miniftry,

and cannot

fet

up Bilhops

among our

felves,

if

we were

of

that Judgment

as

much

as

others

: But

Nations, Commonwealths, and Free

-

cities

might

if

they would.

The

Cloak which you

fsy

is

too

Short,

is

indeed much larger

than our

Cafe requires

:

If

our Nation, or any part

of

it,

did voluntarily cult

of

Bilhops,

did

the Proteltant

Churches, and continue to keep them out to

this

Day.

But

you cannot prove that the Minifters

of

this Affociation did call

them

off.

And for your furmife

of the

Countenance

of

our

Chriltian Charity

:

I an-

fwer, we never

yet giveyou

Caufe

to

fuppofe

that we difinguifh not

between Pro

-

teftant

Bilhops

and Papifts.

Except.

to

Seal. S.

An Argument a

Forticri,all

Logick admits of,

but

I

never heard

a

Sufpicionofany

Firmnels,

inconcluding

ab Imbectlliori,

thus

:

Perhaps, perhaps

I fay,

and

as

many

Moderns

would charitably

think, they may

be

true Presbyters, who were ordained

by Presbyters, (where,

morally

to

fpeak,

and

as

to

confciential pollibility) there

was

animpolhbilityof

procuring Orders from any

Bilhops,

but

fuch

as

would

ob-

lige

them

to

betray

both

Presbyters

and

Bilhops

Authority

to Papal

Ufurpation,

and

arrogated Supremacy; therefore we

alfo,

who might have had Ordination by

Bilhops, and

thole

fuch,

who

have as well

as

we

oft hindred that

papal

Ufurpati-

on,

yea,

had renued that Duration

by an

Oath in

Synod ;

a

little before thefe late

fad Schifms,

and this new attempted Ordination, and

chofe

to be ordained with-

out them contrary

to all the Canons

of

the

Church Univerfal

of

all

Ages,

till

chef&

Iaff Ages

of

this Cotroverfy.

We,

I

fay,

alto

for

all

that,

are true Paflors and

Presbyters, and

we

will

be

acknowledged for fuch in

this

Agreement, and others

to be Popilh Divines, lurking under the Name

of

Epifcopal Divines. Lo, here

a

goodly

Confequence,

and

a

Chriltian Presbyterian Charity.

Reply to

Seít.

y.

a.

Our

Argument

is

not only

a pari,

but

a

fortiori,

as

is

manifefted.

2.

You

give

us

reafon here

to fear that your felf are one of thofe

Perlons whom we

except

againft, and that it

is

your

own

Caufe

that

you

drive

for, and that your Guilt

is

it

that

makes

you angry, for ycu

feem

to

me

to intimate

to

us,

that

you

own

not

their Opinion that

make

the Proteftant Minifters

to

be

Minifters indeed (and

con-

fèquenrly

their Churches true organized Churches) for

all the neceffity which

you

pretend

they

had for you make it but

a

[

perbaps,]

and your double

that

r

perhaps]

that

we

may

fee

you own it not, and you

fay

it

is

[as

many

would

think]

as

if

it

were but their

Thought,

and

as

if

you were

none of

thole many

:

And it

is

but

!the

Moderns]

that

fo

think

as

if

you intimated that Antiquity

judged

otherwife,

which

doubtlefs

you prefer

before

the Moderns

;

and you fay, [they would

think

it]

intimating that

Will

prevails againlf

Judgment,

or

Judgment

follows

not that

Will;

fyea, it

is

charitably] that they

would

think it,

as

it

Affection milled

them:

and other

Paffages

afterward

do

yet further

reveal your

Mind in

this,

though you

are-loath,

I

perceive, to fpeak out,

becaufe

of

the

harfhnefs

of

it

to

Proteltants

Tars;. I

therefore again

fay,

I.

Thofe

churches were

not, nor are to

this

Day un-

der any impolfrbility

of

having

Bilhops,

if

they judged them neceffary.

2.

That

you

prove

not

what you

fay,

that they in

this

Country might

have had

Ordination

by

a

Bilhop, who were ordained

by Presbyters only

:

We leave therefore

our Conte

-

tfuence,

and

our

Chriltian

Presbyterian Charity

to

a

more

equal

Judge, whether

that Man

be

like to

be a

Proteltant, that

taketh the Church

of

Rome

for

a

true

Church,

and

all

the reformed Churches

(except

the Epifcopal,

for no

true Church-

es,

and

that

taketh their

Prieufs

for Lawful Minifters,

and

all

the

Proteltant Mini-

fiefs for none, except

shore

that were ordained

by Bilhops ;

nay,

that

argue,

as

here you do, to

have

us

(and confequently

all fo

ordained)

difclaimed by Paftors

and

People, and confequently

all

our Churches nullified, and publick Worlhip for

-

fáken. Are we fo blind

as

not

to

fee,

that

you thus

not

only prefer the Papilla

be-

fore

sis

(as

much

as

a

true Miniftry

before

no Miniftry, and

a

true Church before

no

Church)

but

hereby would

deliver

us

up into their Hands?

If

we difpute

with

them in

the hearing

of

the People, and

confefs

that theirChurch

is

true, and ours

is

not;

may

not the

People

tautly

fee that it's better join with them than with

us

?

and would

not you your

Self

rather

fubmit to a

Mafs

Pried,

than to

chofe

.whoa you

take for

noMipifters

at all

?

If

you

fay

(you

would have

us

fubmit

to

neither