A27050:278
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.
3. Bishop Bilson, a most Learned and judicious man also, saith more1 for Episcopacy than any of our late Writers; and in my judgment saith more against the Office of Ecclesiastical Elders distinct from Pastors, than can be answered. But to our two main Questions before-mentioned, ⟨p. 48⟩(of a Bishop over many Churches without Bishops under him, and of half-Presbyters) how little he saith the Reader will soon see (yea how much on our side.)
- 1Bilson
4. As for Hooker, till his 7th Book came lately out, we had nothing in1 him considerable of this subject: And in that Book it self, so little to the purpose, as to our foresaid two Controversies, as is next to nothing, nor worthy a Reply. In his §. 2. p. 4. He attempts (that which few do) to give us the definition of a Bishop, which is [A Bishop is a Minister of God, unto whom with permanent continuance, there is given not only 2power of Administering the Word and Sacraments, which power other Presbyters have, but also a further power to Ordain Ecclesiastical persons, and a power of Chiefty in Government over Presbyters as well as Lay men, a power to be by way of Jurisdiction a Pastor even to Pastors themselves.] And then he distinguisheth of Bishops at large or indefinite, and Bishops with restraint, and saith he meaneth the later. And so you have what must be expected from Mr. Hooker for the information of you, what Episcopacy he pleads for: Where it is obvious how fraudulently (through oversight or partiality I know not) he dealeth: For whereas he durst put no more into the definition of Episcopacy about Jurisdiction but [a power of Chiefty in Government over Presbyters as well as Lay-men.] yet would not tell us, whether Government of Lay-men, (under the Bishop) belong to the Presbyters or not: His words seem plainly to imply it; what use else is there for his [Chiefly] and [as well as Lay-men.] And yet twice over he would name nothing but, Teaching and Sacraments which belong to the Pastor as a Pastor in general; leaving it as a thing which he would neither affirm nor deny, whether Pastors Governed their Flocks. Yet all that Decantate Book turneth on the Hinges of this lame Definition (which hath other defects which I pass by;) And without this we cannot know what Subject he disputeth of. Whereas Saravia well noted and acknowledged three Essential parts of the Ministry in General, Mr. Hooker who leaveth out one of them, and yet durst not deny it, should have told us, whether he include it or not; seeing it is the matter of most of our difference; and we take him for no Pastor or Presbyter that is without the power of Government, nor that to be a true Church (in sensu politico) that hath no other Pastor.