A27050:1413
A treatise of episcopacy confuting by Scripture, reason, and the churches testimony that sort…
A treatise of episcopacy confuting by Scripture, reason, and the churches testimony that sort of diocesan churches, prelacy and government, which casteth out the primitive church-species, episcopacy, ministry and discipline and confoundeth the Christian world by corruption, usurpation, schism and persecution : meditated in the year 1640, when the et cætera oath was imposed : written 1671 and cast by : published 1680 by the importunity of our superiors, who demand the reasons of our nonconformity / by Richard Baxter.A treatise of episcopacy confuting by Scripture, reason, and the churches testimony that sort of diocesan churches, prelacy and government, which casteth out the primitive church-species, episcopacy, ministry and discipline and confoundeth the Christian world by corruption, usurpation, schism and persecution : meditated in the year 1640, when the et cætera oath was imposed : written 1671 and cast by : published 1680 by the importunity of our superiours, who demand the reasons of our nonconformity / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for Nevil Simmons, 1681
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.
1. As to their Relation to God, he never expressed his Consent, nor owneth them (that ever I could hear proved) And therefore the Fundamental Contract is wanting. Those that go Dr. Stillingfleet's and Bishop Reynold's way, and say, No Form of Government is of Gods appointment, do grant that the Diocesan form is not: But that the Congregational form is, I have fully proved. Therefore they have not the same Foundation.
1. As to their Relation to God, he never expressed his Consent, nor owneth them (that ever I could hear proved) And therefore the Fundamental Contract is wanting. Those that go Dr. Stillingfleet's and Bishop Reynold's way, and say, No Form of Government is of Gods appointment, do grant that the Diocesane form is not: But that the Congregational form is, I have fully proved. Therefore they have not the same Foundation.
2. And as to the Relation of the Members of a Diocese to one another, there is no mutual consent truly nor seemingly signified by them: what ever some few may do, who are not the Diocese, it is certain that the Diocese as such do neither Explicitly nor Impliedly by word or deed express any such Church consent, but rather the clean contrary. For 1. Their Dwelling in the Diocese is no more a profession of consent, than the Christians dwelling in Constantinople showeth them to be Mahometans: For their Ancestors there lived, and they have no other dwelling.
2. And as to the Relation of the Members of a Diocese to one another, there is no mutual consent truly nor seemingly signified by them: what ever some few may do, who are not the Diocese, it is certain that the Diocese as such do neither Explicitely nor Impliedly by word or deed express any such Church consent, but rather the clean contrary. For 1. Their Dwelling in the Diocese is no more a profession of consent, than the Christians dwelling in Constantinople sheweth them to be Mahometans: For their Ancestors there lived, and they have no other dwelling.