Catholic communion defended against both extremes, and unnecessary division confuted in five parts ...…Catholick communion defended against both extreams, and unnecessary division confuted in five parts ...…

§. 20. P. 21, 22. A great deal more he hath of the like, making Schismatics at his Pleasure. [This is plain in the Case of the Presbyterian and Independent Churches and those other Conventicles — They are Churches in a Church, — Nothing can justify the Distinction of Christians into several Churches, but only such a distance of place as makes it necessary, &c. p. 22. Distinct Churches in the same place can never be under the same Communion.

§. 20. P. 21, 22. A great deal more he hath of the like, making Schismaticks at his Pleasure. [This is plain in the Case of the Presbyterian and Independent Churches and those other Conventicles — They are Churches in a Church, — Nothing can justifie the Distinction of Christians into several Churches, but only such a distance of place as makes it necessary, &c. p. 22. Distinct Churches in the same place can never be under the same Communion.

A. These things are repeated so oft, and the word [separate] so deceitfully rolled over and over, that I will answer all together under his third Case at the End.

§. 21. P. 27. See how openly he recanteth most aforesaid: There is a sense indeed wherein we may be said to be members of one particular Church considered as distinct from all other particular Churches: But that principally consists in Government and Discipline. Every Christian is a member of the Whole ⟨p. 18⟩Christian Church, and in Communion with it, but he is under the immediate instruction and Government of his own Bishop and Presbyters, and is bound to personal Communion with them; and this constitutes a particular Church, in which all Acts of Worship and all Acts of Discipline and Government are under the Direction and conduct of a particular Bishop.]