Baxter - BX5207 B3 A2 1696

40 The L IFE of'the LIB. 1< which the other is uncapableof ; the far greaten part of the Members never fee. ing their Paftor; nor knowing one another any More than if they lived in lèveral partsof the World. And that this Church Form is new, is proved already that is that there wasno Diocefan Church having many Rated Congregations and Altars, ( much lets many hundreds ) and all under one only Bilhop or Governour, either in Scripture time, or two hundredyears after, excepting only that in Alexandria and Rome, fome {hew of more Affembliesthan one under one Bilhop, appeared a lit- tle fooner.) Here note, That it is not an Arcbbifhop's Church that we are fpeaking of , who is but theGeneral Paftar or Bilhop, having other Bifhops and Churches under him ;. but it is a Church infimæ Speciei, commonly called a particular Church, which bath no other Churches or Bifhops under it. And that none filch was inScripture timos, Dr: Hammondhath manifelted .( there being thenno Presbyters tlinin& from Bishops, as he faith on Ait. it.) And that there was none filch of long time after, is abunn dandy proved in my Treatife:of Epifcopacy. § 359. s. The fifth Charge againft the Diocefan Form is, That it extirpateth the ancient Epifopacy r which they prove, by what is làid already : The ancient Bishops were the Heads of the Presbyters and People of one ftngle Church only : To every Church, faith Ignatius, there is one Altar and one Bif,op with the Presbyters, and theDeacons my Fellow Servants. There was then no Bilhop infimæ Speciei as diltinet from an Archbishop, that had more than one Altar and Church : But now all thelèBifhopsof particular Churches are putdown, and no Church of one Altar hath a Bilhop of its own, but only a Church confining of many hundred Wor- {hippingChurches. In the ancient times every City that had a Congregation of Chrillians had a Bilhop : But now every Bifltop hathmany Cities under him,which have all but one Bilhop. For'all our Corporations, called Oppida, Towns, or Bur_ reugbs, were then fach as the word nanrc frgnified, though we have appropriated the English word [City ] to fome few, that have that Title as honorary in favour from the Prince. § 320. 6. The Meth Charge is, That inftead of the ancient Bishops, a later fort of Bishops is introduced, ofa diliin&Species from all the ancient Bishops :. for then there were none but meer Bishops of particular Churches, and the Archbilhops, Metropolitans, and Patriarchs that had the general overlght of there. But ours are of neither of thefe forts: They are not Bishops of particular worshipping. Churches that have one Altar ; but have hundreds of fuch : Nor are they Arch- bifhops ; for theyhave no Bishopsunder them : But they are ¡tun Each as the Arch- bifhops or Metropolitans in thofedays would have been, if they had put down all the Bishops that were under them, and takenall the Charge of Government on them- felves, leaving only TeachingPriests with the People : Even as the Papins feign Gregory to have meant, when he fo vehemently denied the Title of U,tiverfal Bt- Jl op, as putting down the Inferiour Bishops : Now any Man that ehittketh the Spe- cies of Epifcopacy defcribedby Ignatius, and ulèd in the. Primitive times, to be of Divine, or Aponolical Inftitution, mutt needs think that a Species which having depofed them all, doth nand up in their head, is utterly unlawful. And therefore this Argument again( Diocefans is not managed by the Presbyterians as fuch, but by thofe that are for the Primitive Epifcopacy. § 32r. 7. The fèventh Charge againft the Diocefan Form, ( and that which nicketh more than all the tell) is, That it maketh the Church Goverment or Difci- pline which Christ hath commanded, and all the ancient Churches pra&ifed, to be a thing imporble tobe done, and foexcludetb it ; and therefore is unlawful : For to difpureWho Jhall be the Govcrnoursof theCbarch, when the meaning is, Whether there PA be any Government at all (of that fort which Chrin còmmandeth) is the prefenc praftife. For the clearing of this, thefe Queftions are to be debated. Quell t. Whether Chrift bath inftituted any Church-Difcipline ? 2. What that Difiplsne is which be bath inftituted ? 1. Hewmany Parifhes there be in a Dioceß, andPerfosts esa Parifh, who Are to be the Objebs of this Difcipline ? 4. 'Who they be that in England are to exercife this Difspline ? § ;22. r. And for the first Queftion, It is agreed on by all Protenants that I know of, except fome of thole that are called Eraftians ; I fay, forceof them : for I think there are very few evenof the Eraftians that deny it. Dr. Hammond hath written a Treatife for it Entitled, Of the Power of the Keys: yea the Papifts differ not from the Proteftantsin thispoint. therefore be labour in vain to prove it. á 4 332. ``;

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=