A27050:170
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.
When good Gregory Nazianz. was chosen and settled Bishop of Constantinople, and loved and honoured by a good Emperor, yet was he rejected (though he easily yielded) even by the Synod of Bishops, in the arrogancy of their minds, because that he came not in by them. With what pride, what falsehood, what turbulency did Theophilus Alexand. carry on all his business with the Monks, and for the deposing of Chrysostom? And how arrogantly and turbulently did Epiphanius join with him? and even Hierome make himself partaker? And how easily did he get a Synod even where Chrysostom lived to second them? such lamentable instances are more easy than pleasant to be cited.
When good Gregory Nazianz. was chosen and settled Bishop of Constantinople, and loved and honoured by a good Emperour, yet was he rejected (though he easily yielded) even by the Synod of Bishops, in the arrogancy of their minds, because that he came not in by them. With what pride, what falshood, what turbulency did Theophilus Alexand. carry on all his business with the Monks, and for the deposing of Chrysostome? And how arrogantly and turbulently did Epiphanius joyn with him? and even Hierome make himself partaker? And how easily did he get a Synod even where Chrysostome lived to second them? such lamentable instances are more easie than pleasant to be cited.
And that Episcopacy which was set up to prevent Heresy and Divisions, did afford the Heads of most of the Heresies and Divisions that befell the Churches. How few of all the Heresies mentioned by Epiphanius, after that Prelacy was in force, were not Headed and carried on by Prelates? And when the Arian Heresy sprung up by a Presbyter, the Prelates so numerously received it, that they seemed to be the far greater part, if not the1 main body of the Imperial Church: Witness the perverting of many Emperors; the many Councils at Sirmium, Ariminum, &c. And the many new Creeds which Socrates and Hilary so shamefully enumerate and declaim against. So that it was said that the World groaned to find it self turned Arian.