A treatise of episcopacy confuting by Scripture, reason, and the churches testimony that sort…

But no where doth he more palpably yield our Cause, than page 21, 22. where to Cartwright's Objection, that [the Bishop that Cyprian speaketh of is nothing else but such as we call Pastor, or as the common name is Parsons, and his Church whereof he is Bishop is neither Diocese nor Province, but a Congregation which met together in one place to be taught by one man.] He hath no better answer to this, than to tell us, that If it were true, it is impertinent; and that it is not true, because Cyprian had many Presbyters under him, so as they might have every day change for performance of their duty: And he never once attempteth to prove that Cyprian had more Churches, yea, or Assemblies than One; but only that he was over the Presbyters in one Church or Assembly; and as an Archbishop was over Bishops. The same thing which I submit to; but nothing against the things that I assert against him. A Parson may have divers Curates under him, and not divers Churches, much loss a thousand that have no other Bishop?

But no where doth he more palpably yield our Cause, than page 21, 22. where to Cartwright's Objection, that [the Bishop that Cyprian speaketh of is nothing else but such as we call Pastor, or as the common name is Parsons, and his Church whereof he is Bishop is neither Diocess nor Province, but a Congregation which met together in one place to be taught by one man.] He hath no better answer to this, than to tell us, that If it were true, it is impertinent; and that it is not true, because Cyprian had many Presbyters under him, so as they might have every day change for performance of their duty: And he never once attempteth to prove that Cyprian had more Churches, yea, or Assemblies than One; but only that he was over the Presbyters in one Church or Assembly; and as an Archbishop was over Bishops. The same thing which I submit to; but nothing against the things that I assert against him. A Parson may have divers Curates under him, and not divers Churches, much loss a thousand that have no other Bishop?

And whereas page 33. It is objected that many things are innovated in our Discipline, as imposing Ministers on the People without their consent, Bishops Excommunicating alone, Imprisoning, &c. His answer is, that the Church may change her customs; And on that ground alloweth the Ordination of Presbyters alone, because the Church can give them power: For he goeth in Church-matters as he doth in point of Civil Government, on his false supposition, that all Power is Originally in the whole Body, saying, page 37. [The whole Church visible being the true Original subject of all power, it hath not ordinarily allowed any other, than Bishops alone to Ordain. Howbeit as the ordinary course is ordinarily in all things to be observed, so it may be in some cases not unnecessary that we decline from the ordinary ways.] (What is more contrary than Saravia (Tract. de Obedient.) and Hooker in their Principles of Government?) From hence also, page 38. He inferreth the no necessity of continued Succession of Bishops in every effectual Ordination. And it is very observable which he granteth (for it cannot be denied.) [The Power of Orders I may lawfully receive without the asking consent of any multitude: but the power I cannot exercise upon any certain People against their wills.]