A27050:578
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.
If they say that [the Apostles did plant Churches only in Cities comprehending their territories] I answer, 1. They prove that they planted them in Cities; but the silence of the Scriptures proveth not the Negative, that ⟨p. 114⟩they planted none in Villages. 2. Nor have they a word of proof that each Church contained all Christians in the Cities, with all the interjacent Villages. 3. Much less that they must contain all such, when all the Countries were converted, and the Christians were enow for many Churches. 4. Nor can they ever prove that the Apostles planting Churches only in Cities, was intended as a Law, to restrain men from planting them any where else; Any more than their not converting the Villages or the generality of the Cities, will prove that they must not be converted by any other: Or than that their setting up no Christian Magistrates, or converting no Princes, will prove that there must be no such thing. Whoever extended the obligation of Apostolical example to such Negatives, as to do nothing which they did not? 5. The reason is most apparent why they preached first in Cities, because there is no such fishing as in the Sea; They had there the frequentest fullest auditories: And so they planted their first Churches there, because they had most converts there. And it is known that Judea (a barren mountainous Country of it self) had been so harassed with Wars, that there was little safety and quiet expected in Country Villages; and the Roman Empire had been free from the same plague by such short intervals, that as many people as could, got into the Cities: (for all that know by experience what War is, do know the misery of poor Country people who are at every wicked Soldiers mercy.) It was therefore among poor scattered labourers, a hard thing to get a considerable auditory: which maketh Mr. Eliots and his helpers work go on so heavily among the scattered Americans, who have no Cities or great Towns, because they can rarely speak to any considerable numbers. Now to gather from hence either that Villages must have no Churches or no Bishops, is an impiety next to a concluding that they must not be assembled, taught, or worship God.
If they say that [the Apostles did plant Churches only in Cities comprehending their territories] I answer, 1. They prove that they planted them in Cities; but the silence of the Scriptures proveth not the Negative, that ⟨p. 114⟩