2j0 The HISTORY oj the PuRITANs. VoL. II. K. Charles.Lhe is bound to fupport it by his coronation oath. Laftly, His majefl-y de– ~~ fires to kno':" of Mr. Henderjon, what w.arr~nt, there .is in the word of - God, for fubjeCl:s to endeavour to force the1r kmg s confc1ence, or to make him alter laws againft his will. Mr. HenMr. HENDERSON in his firft paper of June 3· after an introduCtion derfon's firjl of modefiy and refpeB:, wi!hes when occafion requires, that religion B'f~Y·Reg. P· might a! ways be reformed by the civi~ magifhate, ~nd not left eith~r to the .312 , &c. prelates or the people; ~ut when pn.nces or mag1fl:rat:s are negligent of their duty, God may ibr up the fubj eB: to perform th1s work. He ob– ferves that the reformation of king Henry VIII. was very defeCl ive in the elfentials of doClrine, worfhip, and government, that it proceeded with a laodicean lukewarmnefs; that the fupremacy was transferred from one wrong head to another, and the limbs of the antichriflian hierarchy were .vifible in the body. He adds that the imperfeClion of the englifh refor– .mation, had been the compla int of many religious and godly perfons; that it had occafioned more fchifm and feparation than had been heard of elfe– where, and ' been matter of unfpeakable grief to other churches As to the king's .argument, that the .validity of the priefthood, and the efficacy of the facraments depended upon epifcopacy, he replies, that epifcopacy cannot make out its claim to apoflolical appointment; that when the apo{:. ties were living, there was no difference between a bifhop and a pre!byter J 110 inequality in power or degree, but an exaC1: parity in every bram h of their charaCter: That there is no mention in fcripture of a paftor or bifhop fuperior to other pafrors. There is a beautiful fubordination in the minif– try of the new teftament ; one kind of miniflers being placed in degree and dignity above another, as fi rft ·apofiles, then evangelifl:s, then pall:ors and teachers, but in offices of the fame rank and kind we don't find any ,preference; noapoflle isconftituted fuperior to other apoftles; noevangelifls is rai fed above other evangelill:s; nor has any paf1:or or deacon a fuperiority .above others of their order. Farther, Mr. HENDERSON humbly defi res his majefiy to take notice, that arguing from the practice of the primitive church, and the confent of the fathers, is fallacious and uncertain, and that the la'Wand tejtimony if the word if God is the only rule. The praClice of the primitive .church, in .many things, cannot certainly be known, as Eufebius con- .felfes ; that even in the apollle's time Diotrephes moved for the pre– .eminence, and the myftery if iniquity began to work; and th at afterwards ambition and weaknefs quickly made way for a change in church .government. Mr. Henderfon hopes his majefry will not deny the lawfulnefs of the .minifiry, and due adminiftration of the facraments, in tbofe reformed .churches where .there are no diocefan bilhops ; that it is evident from fcrip-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=