A26880:695
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 ...…
Catholic communion defended against both extremes, and unnecessary division confuted in five parts ... / by Richard Baxter ...Catholick communion defended against both extreams, and unnecessary division confuted in five parts ... / by Richard Baxter ...
London: printed for Tho. Parkhurst, 1684
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.
What can the man mean by it, if he could speak his mind? Sure nothing but that their Office is of the same species, and they bound to use it in their several places, as from one Christ, under one Law of his, with the greatest Love and Concord they can, and for the common good of one Universal Church: Can he mean more, without gross Error? And who denieth any of this, as to the Episcopacy of Christ's institution?
§ 37. [They are bound to govern where it can be had, by mutual advice and consent].
Ans. So far as the end requireth, The common good: So say the Independents: And is that the Unity so much talked of?
Ans. So far as the end requireth, The common good: So say the Independents: And is that the Unity so much talkt of?
§ 38. ['No Bishops are absolutely independent, but are obliged to preserve the Unity of the Episcopacy—Those Churches must be independent which have an independent Power and Government, as all must have that have independent Governors or Bishops; and independent Churches can never make one Body, and one Catholic Communion, because they are not Members of each other.