Five disputations of church-government and worship

§. 7. And then 6. Why do you in your Definitions of Episcopacy (which you very seldom and sparingly give us) require no more then a Parochial Episcopacy, and yet now despise it as if it were no Episcopacy at all? Tell us plainly what you mean by a Bishop? I thought you meant a Primus Presbyterorum, or at least, a Ruler of People and Presbyters? And is not this to be found in a Parish Bishop, as well as in a Bishop of many Parishes, or Churches? Change your Definition from this day forward, if you must have a change of the thing defined, as it seems you must.

§. 8. And I wou•d know whether you can prove that it is Essential to a Bishop to have more Churches or Parishes then one? Prove it if you are able. Was not great Gregory of Naocesarea a ⟨p. 319⟩Bishop with his seventeen souls? And was not Alexander (the Collier) whom he Ordained at Comana, a Bishop, though but of a small Assembly? Do not some of you confess, that Bishops in Scripture-times had no subject Presbyters, and consequently had but a single Congregation? If then a Parish or Congregational Bishop were a true Bishop, why may he not be so still?

§. 8. And I wou•d know whether you can prove that it is Essential to a Bishop to have more Churches or Parishes then one? Prove it if you are able. Was not great Gregory of Naocesarea a ⟨p. 319⟩Bishop with his seventeen souls? And was not Alexander (the Colliar) whom he Ordained at Comana, a Bishop, though but of a small Assembly? Do not some of you confess, that Bishops in Scripture-times had no subject Presbyters, and consequently had but a single Congregation? If then a Parish or Congregational Bishop were a true Bishop, why may he not be so still?