4. I take it for granted that the Convocation is not the Constitutive-Head, 1. Because it is so seldom in being, that then we should seldom have a Church of England: For the Essence ceaseth with the essential part. 2. And the Canon thundereth against them that deny the Convocation to be the Representative-Church of England. If it mean of the whole Church, Pastors and People, then the People rule, and make Canons by them (as the Separatists hold:) And it is the Head of the Church only that we enquire after. If they mean the Clergy, then the Representative-Church or Head must be somewhat distinct from the Real represented. If it be the whole Clergy that is the Real Represented-Church or Head, ⟨p. 37⟩then we are Popular, or Presbyterian; for the Presbyters are the major part by far. And what Rulers are they that never rule the Church as one, by themselves, but only by Representatives. I confess easily that many Churches united under one King, and living in one Kingdom, and having thereby special opportunity for Synods, and Correspondence and Concord, may be called one Church, by a denomination, 1. accidental, 2. and humane, not used in Scripture; And we will not be so quarrelsome as to avoid that language where men will needs use it: But it is the Thing, and not the Name, that we enquire of: What is that One Essential Constitutive-Head which maketh the Churches of England to be all one Church, in a proper political sense, that is, as a Governed-Society? None question the Civil-Head; none question the need of Communion and Agreement among all these Churches. But the Question is only of the one Ecclesiastic Constitutive Head. And if you will have the Question to be de nomine, pardon us for holding that forma denominat. But if you will denominate many Churches [One] from One Accident, instead of One Individual Form or Essence; and if you will use terms in Divine Matters, which God never so used in his Word, we contend not against you, but only desire to understand you, when you charge us with Schism from the Church of England. ⟨p. 38⟩We have observed what hath been the effect of such another enterprise in the Roman Empire: It was thought meet by Princes that where the Empire was One, the Church should be in some sort One also, which was under them. Whereupon Rome had the chief Patriarchate. But in time, 1. this Humane-Unity (name and thing) is pretended to be Divine; 2.
4. I take it for granted that the Convocation is not the Constitutive-Head, 1. Because it is so seldom in being, that then we should seldom have a Church of England: For the Essence ceaseth with the essential part. 2. And the Canon thundreth against them that deny the Convocation to be the Representative-Church of England. If it mean of the whole Church, Pastors and People, then the People rule, and make Canons by them (as the Separatists hold:) And it is the Head of the Church only that we enquire after. If they mean the Clergy, then the Representative-Church or Head must be somewhat distinct from the Real represented. If it be the whole Clergy that is the Real Represented-Church or Head, ⟨p. 37⟩then we are Popular, or Presbyterian; for the Presbyters are the major part by far. And what Rulers are they that never rule the Church as one, by themselves, but only by Representatives. I confess easily that many Churches united under one King, and living in one Kingdom, and having thereby special opportunity for Synods, and Correspondence and Concord, may be called one Church, by a denomination, 1. accidental, 2. and humane, not used in Scripture; And we will not be so quarrelsome as to avoid that language where men will needs use it: But it is the Thing, and not the Name, that we enquire of: What is that One Essential Constitutive-Head which maketh the Churches of England to be all one Church, in a proper political sense, that is, as a Governed-Society? None question the Civil-Head; none question the need of Communion and Agreement among all these Churches. But the Question is only of the one Ecclesiastick Constitutive Head. And if you will have the Question to be de nomine, pardon us for holding that forma denominat. But if you will denominate many Churches [One] from One Accident, instead of One Individual Form or Essence; and if you will use terms in Divine Matters, which God never so used in his Word, we contend not against you, but only desire to understand you, when you charge us with Schism from the Church of England. ⟨p. 38⟩We have observed what hath been the effect of such another enterprize in the Roman Empire: It was thought meet by Princes that where the Empire was One, the Church should be in some sort One also, which was under them. Whereupon Rome had the chief Patriarchate. But in time, 1. this Humane-Unity (name and thing) is pretended to be Divine; 2.
