A27050:340
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.
Page 46. He saith [Cenchrea was subject to the Church of Corinth, and never had a Bishop of their own.] But not a syllable of proof: It is not a Family Church, which we speak of, therefore he need not here have mentioned that: But a Church associated for ordinary Communion in God's public worship, which cannot be celebrated without a Pastor. Let him prove that Cenchrea was such a Church and yet had no Bishop.
Page 46. He saith [Cenchrea was subject to the Church of Corinth, and never had a Bishop of their own.] But not a syllable of proof: It is not a Family Church, which we speak of, therefore he need not here have mentioned that: But a Church associated for ordinary Communion in God's publick worship, which cannot be celebrated without a Pastor. Let him prove that Cenchrea was such a Church and yet had no Bishop.
In §. 6. p. 49. He would prove that the Circuit of a Church was in the Intention of the Apostles, or first Founders, the same from the beginning, before the division of Churches as after: Which I shall in due place disprove: His reasons are, 1. Because the whole Church since the Apostles days hath so understood the intention of the Apostles.
In §. 6. p. 49. He would prove that the Circuit of a Church was in the Intention of the Apostles, or first Founders, the same from the beginning, befor• the division of Churches as after: Which I shall in due place disprove: His reasons are, 1. Because the whole Church since the Apostles days hath so understood the intention of the Apostles.
Ans. 1. This is not proved. 2. I shall anon prove the contrary; that the Apostles had no intention that Churches should be defined by the limits ⟨p. 62⟩