Baxter - BV669 B3 1681

ll ,tl ( 78 ) ret Presbyters'havefo this Ordinarypower,, that theycannot byHumaneEcclefia. fìicn1 Right reduce it into Ail, till applyedby the &pop in his Diocefs And c. 9. 5. 1 t. p. 286. ¢. 13. p. 287. He fheweth, that in Vacancies, or the Bifhops Abfence, the Clergyof Presbyters have the whole Epifco- pal powerof Government. And p. z88, 289. He laboureth to prove, that one Church had many Bifhops, and that it is. but Ecclefiaftical Law or Cultome that one Church Mould have but one : Bilhop. And §. 15. That if the Canons - prohibited not, a Bithop might make all his Parifh Presbyters full Bifhops, as (S. 16.) in the Miniflerial EJfenti- als towards the Faithful, they are by Divine Right equals. Yid. 5. 20. page 291. This is enough to fayof Spalatenfis, fave that all that he faith for Bi.. Shops againft us, is fo little apart ofwhat is faid by the reft, that it can requirenonewAnfwer. And if this great Moderator, (who returned to Rome, though fora miferable imprifonment and end) becahfe we are not yet near enough to Antiquity, (or rather being flattered into covetous andambitious hopes) be able to proveno greater a difference between Bi- fhops and Presbyters, we need not think that any other is like to do it. Dr. Ham- .r6. The laft great, Learned, Sober Defender of Epifcopacy, and the mnttdan- laft that I need to mention here, is Donor Hammond, who in his Anno. fwered. tations, and his Treat. of the Keys, and efpecially his Dif ertations a- gainft Blonde!, and his Defence of them againft the London Minifters, bath faid much in thisCaufe. But his way is new (fave that he followeth Pera_ vins in the main fuppofition :) He forfaketh almoft all the Fathers, and almoft all the Patrons of Epifcopacy of later times (who have written for it) in theExpofition of all the Texts of Scripture which mention the Eldersand Bifhops of Churches in thofe times, fuppofing that they all fpeakof Bifhops only. Inhis Treat. of the Keys, he maintaineth that the power of them was given to the Apoftles onely by Chrift, and to Bifhops as their Succefl'ors by the Apoftles. But I take it for undeniable truth, that the Bifhops and Elders fettled in everyChurch by the Apoftles in their own time, had this power, and I need not expect acontradii`ìion in it. And how fitly thofe are called the Apeflles Succeffers, whom they fet over the Churches in their own time, even from the beginning that they fettled Churches, and with whom they continued in the fame Churchesmany Months or Years (as Paid in Afia, I leave to others to judge. But theQ.9eftion isnot whether Bithops have the power of the Keys, but whether all Presbyters have it not alto ? And T. He fheweth that (ac- cording to theCanons,) the Presbyters might do nothing in this or in o- ther AdsofMiniftration, withoutthe Bill-lop- 2. That our Eng ifh Or- dainers, though they fay, Receive theHoly Ghof*, whofe fins yen do remit, it fhall