A26860:460
An answer to Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlock, confuting an universal humane church-supremacy aristocratical…An answer to Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlocke, confuting an universal humane church-supremacy aristocratical…
An answer to Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlock, confuting an universal humane church-supremacy aristocratical and monarchical, as church-tyranny and popery : and defending Dr. Isaac Barrow's treatise against it by Richard Baxter ; preparatory to a fuller treatise against such an universal sovereignty as contrary to reason, Christianity, the Protestant profession, and the Church of England, though the corrupters usurp that title.An answer to Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlocke, confuting an universal humane church-supremacy aristocratical and monarchical, as church-tyranny and popery : and defending Dr. Isaac Barrow's treatise against it by Richard Baxter ; preparatory to a fuller treatise against such an universal soveraignty as contrary to reason, Christianity, the Protestant profession, and the Church of England, though the corrupters usurp that title.
London: printed for Thomas Parkhurst, 1682
Chapter 5: Wherein Mr. Dodwell's deceits, and the danger of them do consist.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
3▪ But I think most of the Hierarchical way will say, that the Apostles first Ordained Bishops, that those Bishops might Ordain subject-Presbyters. And if so, the Churches could be but single Congregation at the first till the subject-Presbyters were Ordained Yea, Dr. Hammond (as aforesaid) asserteth (in Act. 11. and in Dissert. &c.) that there is no proof there were any of the Order of subject-Presbyters in Scripture-times; and he thinketh that most of his party were of his mind; and that the name Bishop, Elder and Pastor in Scripture signify only those that we now call Bishops. And in this he followeth Dion. Petavius, and Fr. a Sancta Clara de Episcop. who saith that it came from Scotus. And if this be so, then in all Scripture-times there was no Church of more than one worshipping Congregation. For we are agreed that ⟨p. 134⟩Church-meetings were for the public Worship of God, and celebration of Sacraments, and exercise of Discipline, which no mere Lay-man might lawfully guide the people in, and perform as such assemblies did require. And one Bishop could be but in one place at once. And if there were many Bishops, there were many Churches. So that according to Dr. Hammond and all of his mind, there was no Church in Scripture-times of more than one stated ordinary Worshipping Congregation, because there were no subject-Presbyters.
3▪ But I think most of the Hierarchical way will say, that the Apostles first Ordained Bishops, that those Bishops might Ordain subject-Presbyters. And if so, the Churches could be but single Congregation at the first till the subject-Presbyters were Ordained Yea, Dr. Hammond (as aforesaid) asserteth (in Act. 11. and in Dissert. &c.) that there is no proof there were any of the Order of subject-Presbyters in Scripture-times; and he thinketh that most of his party were of his mind; and that the name Bishop, Elder and Pastor in Scripture signifie only those that we now call Bishops. And in this he followeth Dion. Petavius, and Fr. a Sancta Clara de Episcop. who saith that it came from Scotus. And if this be so, then in all Scripture-times there was no Church of more than one worshipping Congregation. For we are agreed that