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 ...…

LXI. 11. If (e. g. at Frankford, Zurick, Lubeck, Hamburg, &c.) a Church is settled in the Lutheran way, and another in the Bohemian way, described by Lasitius and Commenius, (which is a conjunction of Episcopacy, Presbytery and Independency) or a Church that had no Liturgy, or none but that which the French Protestants and Dutch have, would it be damning Schism, for such as Cox and Horne at Frankford to set up an Episcopal Church in the English mode, and with their Liturgy, and so far to separate from the rest?

LXI. 11. If (e. g. at Frankford, Zurick, Lubeck, Hamburgh, &c.) a Church is settled in the Lutheran way, and another in the Bohemian way, described by Lasitius and Commenius, (which is a conjunction of Episcopacy, Presbytery and Independency) or a Church that had no Liturgy, or none but that which the French Protestants and Dutch have, would it be damning Schism, for such as Cox and Horne at Frankford to set up an Episcopal Church in the English mode, and with their Liturgy, and so far to separate from the rest?

LXII. 12. If it be true that John Major, Fordone, and others say that Presbytery was the Government of the Church of Scotland before Episcopacy was brought in, was the introduction of Episcopacy by Palladius a damning ⟨p. 35⟩Schism by separating from the former, or a Reformation; is just Reformation Schism?

LXII. 12. If it be true that Iohn Maior, Fordon, and others say that Presbytery was the Government of the Church of Scotland before Episcopacy was brought in, was the introduction of Episcopacy by Palladius a damning ⟨p. 35⟩Schism by separating from the former, or a Reformation; is just Reformation Schism?