A Preface to the Reader. of honour , extent of furifditlion Ecclefiaftical fubjetlion to, orexemption from oneanother, the confiderablenefs oftheir cities in the civil fiate oftheRomane Empire where they did refide, was ffill themoll prevalent and cogent argument in their brawles: the mofi notable brufh, that in all Antiquity we find given to the great Leviathanof Rome , who fported himfelfe in thofegatherings together of the watersofpeople, dmultitades,and nationsand tongues,or the ge- neral counfells( as they are called ) was from an Argument , taken from the feate of the Em- pire,being fixt at Confiantinople, making it becomenew Rome,fo that the Bífhop of the Church there was to enjoyequal priviledge , withhim whore lot was fallen in the old Emperial Ci- ty ; but our `Dotlour addes Sea: 5. lilted ex 7udeorum exemplars tranfcripfi ffe Apofioli videntur : cum Mofaicâ id legecautum errs ,set fsedices & minifiri in qualibet civitate ordinarentur, Deut: 16. 18: ilia ve- ro in rebus dubiis ad fudicem(tMofie fuccefforemfynedrio ) Hierofolymitano cintlum recurrere tenerentur, Cap: 17 9: and in SeElion6: he proves Hierafalem to have been the Metropolisof that whole nation. Egregiamvero laudeml But I TheDoElour I prefume knowes before this , that thofe with whom he bath to do will never give him the thing in quefiion uponbis begging , or requeft. That which alone falls in under our confideration and enquiry is , whether theApoftles infituted any fuch model of Church-Order and Goverment as is by the Dalourcontended for; to this he tells you, that theApoftles Teem to have done it , from the patterne of Molokai inflitutionsin the Churche of the ieWes; But,Dotlour, the Quenon is not,with whatrefpeEl theydid it,but whether they did itat all it no; this the Doflour thought good to letalone untilanother time, if we would not grant him uponhis petition , that fo they did. z This then is the Dolours fecond argument for his Diocefan,and Metropolitan Prelates. His firft was , fromthe example of theHeathens, in their civil Admininration and Rule, this fecond from the exampleof the fewes.Notto divert into the handlingof the Churchand Po- litical ¡lateof the?ewes , as appointed ofGod, nor that diffonancy that is between the Infi- tution of civil Magiflrates , andEvangelical admsniflrations ; this is the fummeof theDo- Sours reafoning inhis 5,6,7,and8 Sellions.God in theCburch,and among the people ofthe ?ewes, chafe outone City,roplace his name there,maleing it theplace wherea{l theTypesr ceremonies which he had appointedfor the difcovery , and"Wowing forth of the Lord fefus Chrifl , were vi¡bayand glorioufly to be managed , ailed , andheldforth ( fundry of them being fach, as whole Typicalnefs Would have been deflroyed by their multiplication ) and principally on this account , making that place or City ( whichwas firft Shilo ) thefeat ofthe kingdome , or habitation ofthe cheif Ruler for the adminifirationof ?office, who appointed fudges in all the land, for thegoodandpeace of the peopie:therefore the Churchesof JensChrift,difperfed over the face of the whol world, freed from Obligations to Ciries,or Mountuines,walkingbeforeGod, in, and with a pureand fpiritual woríhip, having no one Reafon of that former infitution in common with the Churchofthe fewer, muff be can into the famemould and figure : I hopewithout offence I may take leave to deny the Confequeoce , andwhat more I have to fay to this Argument I fhall yet deferre. But theDaílour proceeds to prove, that indeed the Apofiles did difpofe of the Churches in thisframe and order, according to thepatterne ofthe civil goverment of theRomane Em- pire, and that inflituted ofGodamong the fewes. The ninthSefiton,wherin he attempts the proofof this Affection, is as followeth: card hone Imaginem, ApoflolosEccle/ias ubig3 difpanendas carafe , tr in omnibus plantationi- bus fui.t, minorum ab eminentioribue civitatibuu dependentiam, Cr fubordinationem conflituiffe exemplis quidemplurimis monflrari port , illsed in Syria, d Ciliciapatet , Aft : 16.4 .cum enienChrnµa illud, cap 15. 2. Hierofolrmas referretur ab Ecclefta'Idiot Antiochia , Cap. 14. z6,&15.3.& decretuns ab Apoffolio denses ad cos mitteretur,v:22.inEpiflold, quâ decretumWad continebaturfimul cum Antiochen/Abut soli s 1 ooe ssxj tousles zdirps comprehenfos videmue,v: 23. Dein Epiflolâ ill ei eAntiochenà Ecclefia reddita v: 3o. Paulus tandem& Sylas Syriam cr Cili- clamperagrantes,v:4.cap.I6.4.diyuam x010eR01.24 Nose 4;"Aao0-0t00,fngulis civitatibus obfervan- da eradiderunt,ut qua adhone Antiochia t.24'etropolin,ut totidemfubordinata Ecclefia pertinerent; ut et ipfa Antiochia adHierefolymas, primariam tam lata (ut ex Philone pradiximua) provincia t- etrepelin pertinebat , d'ad earn addirimendam ¡item iffam f conferebat. This being all that theDoilour bath to producefrom the Scripture to his purpofe in hand, I have tranfctibed it at large; for this being removed, all that follows,will fall of it's own ac- cord. I Then thedependance on , andfubordination ofleffer Citties, to the greater,isaffected au
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=