A69533:220
Five disputations of church-government and worship
Five disputations of church-government and worship by Richard Baxter.
London: printed by R.W. for Nevil Simmons, 1659
Whether it be Necessary or Profitable to the right order or the Pea… › Section
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.
Prop. 10. Nay its certain that they were so far from being the sole Bishops of such or such a Diocese, that they had usually some more unfixed general Officers with them. Paul and Barnabas went together at first: and after the Division, Barnabas and Mark, Paul and Silas, and sometimes Timothy, and sometime Epaphroditus, and sometime others went together afterward. And others as well as James were usually at Jerusalem: and all these had a general power where they came. And it cannot be proved that James was Ruler of Peter, Paul and the rest when they were at Jerusalem, nor that he had any higher power then they.
Prop. 10. Nay its certain that they were so far from being the sole Bishops of such or such a Diocess, that they had usually some more unfixed general Officers with them. Paul and Barnabas went together at first: and after the Division, Barnabas and Mark, Paul and Silas, and sometimes Timothy, and sometime Epaphroditus, and sometime others went together afterward. And others as well as Iames were usually at Ierusalem: and all these had a general power where they came. And it cannot be proved that Iames was Ruler of Peter, Paul and the rest when they were at Ierusalem, nor that he had any higher power then they.
Prop. 11. Yet it seems that the several Apostles did most look after those same Churches which themselves had been the instruments of gathering, and that some addition of respect was due to those that had been spiritual Fathers to them, above the rest, 1 Cor. 4.15.
Prop. 12. It was therefore by the General Commission of Apostleship that they Governed particular Churches pro tempore while they were among or near them, and not by any special Commission or Office of being the Diocesan or Metropolitan of this or that place. 1. It was below them, and a diminution of their honour to be so affixed, and take the charge of any particular Churches. 2. We find not that ever they did it. 3. If they had, then all the disorders and ungovernedness of those Churches would be imputable to them, and therefore they must be still with them as fixed Bishops are, seeing they cannot govern them at such a distance as make them uncapable. 4. When