Numb. I. lIPPLNDIX. or whether the Clergy be exempted from filch punifhmenr by-the Seca-far power; till theyare delivered up to them by the EcclefafticalHead , bath been voltioai, noufly difputed in the world already. Surclsffe, Bilfan Jewel, and a multitude more have proved, that Kings have power in all Caufes , andover all Perlons, as well Eccleflanical as Civil ; and that the Popehath no power of Jurisdi&ion in Eng- land, lettheOath of Supremacy judge; and if the Metropolitan of Canterbury, or the higheft Ecclefiaffical Power mifcarry , who fhallrelirain or eje& them but the Civil Power, unlefs we go to the Pope ? for more acceptablewitneffes Icorn- mend to youSpalatenfis, Grotitu, and Saravia, yea Fr. de Pie -aria, and feveral Parifsans; The two former, one de Republ. Ecclef the other de Imperio fenimarumpoteflarum, will never be well anfwered. If It be faid -theKing did it nor. 1 anfwer, I think the Authority by whom that much was done, that we now.fpeait of, will be acknow- ledged fufficient by molt that were againft the fa&, and that fought against the Parliament that tinderftoodthe Laws. It was"long before the Kingwithdrew. T. Manyof thofe that approved of the Eje&ion of thofe unworthy men, yet appro.. ved not of the diffolution of the Office and fuck may be many (and for ought you knowmat or all) of the Minífiers'here Aftociated. (Though I fuppofe rather it is otherwife) yet while Men do for peace filence their Opinions, who knowswhat they are ? And fure I am, many amongus had no hand in thedownfall of theBi- (hops ; and whether any at all be lyable in this toyour Charge betides: my felt; (whereof more anon) I know not ; moft of our Affociationwere in the IJniverft- ties, in the Wars; and the tell were (fame I am fitte, if not all) quiet its their Ha- bitations, main theKings Quarters, not -lb much as taking the Covenant ; fo that I know not howyou can except againft them as cafting out the,Bilhops. What tell you themof other Mens A&ions? could they help it ? what if it be in a time When Bifhops were foEje&ed, when youcannot prove them guilty of it ? 4. The Covenant it fell doth not reje& all Bithops, but only fuch as Hood in England, and fo concatenated to Chancellors, Deans, &c. and withfuch an Explication Mr.Cole- man gave it to the Houfeof Lords.. If therefore youcould prove, that theAffoci- aced Mininers have taken the Covenant , (which you have not done) yet that proves not that they were the Eje&ors of the Bithops. 6. There is no Bithop (that weknow of) over this Diocefe. 7. You cannot prove that thofe that were Ordain. ed by meer Presbyters, might havehad Epifcopal Ordination (of which more a non). 8. It is notthe Regularity of the Ordination that wedeliire you toacknow- ledge, but only its being; fo that it is not anullity. So that you may fee how un- faithfully you flared the cafe ; which is rather this , Whether when the Bithop ófpù h t. Diocefs is dead, and the roll taken down by the Reigning Power, and we know nor where to have EpifcopalOrdination, or at leaf, without -the greatfieffiring of the Bithops on adhani the proton Powers wi8 inflitl fó great a penalty, if they Ordain, of in this cafe any be Or- dained by sneer Presbyters, arewe bonrìd to'yeìdge them noMinifters, yea and to ref fe Af fociatiog with ethersfor their-fakes? Whether'oürChurchdoors muf!be 'hutup, andGods pub- lick Worfhip thrown away,'till the Rulers will permit, and the Presbyters and People admit Bifhopt'aeain ; and Miniflers and Churches all be null? yea I do no find you' prove that our Agreement requires any facia acknowledgment, as your felf intimateth , of which next. Except. ;. Mr. Baxter himfelf I name for one a Principal of this Affociatlon, andprote fling it one end,of this Affociation, that they may he acknowledged for true Presby- tersand Parlors-of their Churches, by all who enter into this Agreement, vid.p. 14: and the two 1aß lines, andp. ay. for eightlines ; all'o p. a4. Reaf xi. and Reaf. ra; p. 47. mid. and p. 49. fin. Reply to Sell. 3.' For my Pelf I think you have more againft me than any other Man in your.Af- fociation. But yet r. you have not proved , that I hadnot Epifcopal Ordination; which indeed I had. z. Nor that I contented to theremoval of their Calling: If I did fo, yet till you can knowit, you have no juff ground for your alienation.. T. If I did confent,yet that nulleth'net my former Call. 4. You know not if I did.; whether I repent ornot: 5. No man mull bereje&ed for a fault fuppofed,without a ¡aft Tryal, in all Equity you fhould hear mefpeak for my felf. I havepublickly offeredfatisfa&ion to any that are offended with trim 6. What ifI only werefaulty? would that warrant you to feparate from all the ten for my fake'? 7; But what dd you alledge againft me ? That I would have an acknowledgment that we are true Presbyters and Patton ? A heinous Crime ? that .I will not yield to have Gods Church amongus unchurchedby the Papins , and his Worfhip cal/ aide for want A a of
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=