Owen - Houston-Packer Collection BT768 .O9 1654

A Preface to the Reader, men that he fhould be beholding toGrotius, Both exceedingly unbecome the Doilours gravi- ty, and felfe denyal. This is complainedof by fome who have rryed it in reference to his lace comment on theRevelation. And in this ditfettation, he is put by his own thoughts, (I will not fay guilty ) to an Apology cap. i. Sell. 24. uá inre fuffragi. m fuum rich(re Hugonem Gra- tium rìv z*oru ex annotationibus poffhumis nuper editis poflquam hvcamniaTypographo tran- fcriptaefent , ccsrfimper1n1isedotbumgratular. Lei not the Reader think that Du tour Ham: had tranfmitted his papers full of rare conjetlures to the Printer , before Grotius Annotations upon the Revelations were publilhed, but only beforehe had read them. The Doflcur little thinks what a fly this is in his pot ofOintment , not how undecent with all impartial men, fach Apologies , tubfervient to a frame of fpirit in bondage to a man's own Efteem and Rev putation,appear tobe:but let this pafs:and let the Saints that call upon the name of7,fus Chrifi in every place be the Saints in every part ofAchaia though the Epiftle it felfe ( written in- deed uponoccafion taken from the ChurchofCorinth , yet ) was given by infpiration from God,for the ufe not only ofall the Saints in the whole world,at that timewherein it was writ- ten but ofall thofe who were to believe in any part or place of the world to the end thereof; although the affertion of it be not builton any tolerable conjefure, but may be re- jeRed with the fame facility wherewith it is tendred; what nowwill hence enfue? Why hence it followes that Clement allowrote his Epiftle to all the Churches to Achaia.Very good? Paul writingan Epiftle entituled cheifly to the Corinthians,exprefyand av rt;le directs it to the Saints or Churches of Achaia,yea to all that call upon the name ofGod ineveryplace, fo that his Epiftle beingofCatholick concernment , is not to be confined to the Church ofCorinth only , al- though moll of the particular things mentioned in that Epiftle related only ro that particu- lar Church; Therefore, Clement direCting his Epiftle to the Church ofCorinthonly, not once mentioning nor infinuating anintention ofextending It toany other , handling in ir, only the peculiar concernment of that Church, & a differenceabout one or ttbo Derivai therein, muff be fuppofed to have written to ail the Churches ofAchaia. Andíf fuck Arguments as thefe, will ñot prove Epifcapacy to be ofApoftolical confutation, what will prevaile with men fo to efteem it? Si Pergama 4extradefendi poffent, eti im ha'c defenfa fuiffent. And this is the caufe of namingmanyElders or Presbyters in one Church : For my part I fuppofe the Doltour might more probably have adhered to a former conjeetureofhis,Difert. 4,1 cap. t o. Sett:9.Concer. ping two fundr), different Churches,where were ddtin t officers in the fameCitty:primo(faith he)refpendeo non mfg quaff verum efl,quadpro concefofumitur,quamvis min; inuva Eccle is au: -cats, plures(;msl Epifcopi nunquamfuerint (prayexcept themmentioned,All:zo 28:and thofe Ali :14. z 3 ) nihil tarnen ebflare pin in cadres civitate duo aliquanda taros diflerminati fuerint. He might( I fay) with more thew ofprobability have abode by this obfervation, then to have rambledover all Greece , to relieve himfelfe againft his Adverfaries. But yet neither would this fuflïce. What ufe may or will be made of this conceßïon thall elfe where be ma- nifefted. But the Doltour hath yet another Anfwerto this multiplication ofElders, and the mention of themwith Deacons with the eminent identity that is between them and Bifbaps through the whole Epiffle , the fate perlons being unqueflionably intended in refpe9 ofthe fame office,by both thefe appellations.Now this fecond Anfwer is founded upon the fuppoli- tion ofthe former: (a goodly foundation!) namely,that theEpiftle nnder confederationwas -written and lent not to the ChurchofCorinth only, but to all the Churches of Achaia , of whichCorinth was the L?1letropolitan. Now this fecond anfwer is , that the Elders or Presbyters here mentioned , were properly chore whom he calls B+flsops, Diocefans :men ofa third rankand order above Deacons, and Presbyters in the Church- Adminifirations and goverment. And for thofe who are properly called Pres- byters, there were then none in the Church , to give colour to this miferable evallon , Differ: 4. chap. toot : He difcourfeth about the goverment andorderingofChurch affaires by Ri- ¡hops and Deacons, In Come Churches that were fmall,not yet formed or compleated,nor come to perfec ion at the firft planting ofthem : how well this is accomodated to the Church of Corinth whichClement calls,godem eteo , a.'oxaíao: &which himfelfe would have to be aMe- tropolitical Church,being confefredly grear,numerous;furnifhed with great and large gifts,& abilties is feen withhalfe an eye. How ill allo this fhift is accommodated to hclpe in the cafe for whole fetvice it was firft invented,is no lets evident. It was to fave the fword ofPhil: r, r. From the throatof the Epifcopacy he contendeth for; That Epiftle is direéfed to the Saints, or Church at Philippi, with the Bifbaps and 'DWOW. Two things do here trouble our Da. star. r The mention of more BiAops then one at Philippi. z The knitting together, of Bifhops and'Deacons as the only two orders in the Church, bringingdown Epi/copecy one degree