Five disputations of church-government and worship

Argument 1. That sort of Prelacy or other Government which destroyeth the End of Government, and is certainly inconsistent with the Necessary Government and discipline to be exercised in the Churches, is not to be restored, under pretence of the Churches Order or Peace (nor can be consistent with its right Order and Peace.) But such is the Episcopacy which was of late exercised in England, and is now laid by. Therefore, &c.

Argument 1. That sort of Prelacy or other Government which destroyeth the End of Government, and is certainly inconsistent with the Necessary Government and discipline to be exerci•ed in the Churches, is not to be restored, under pretence of the Churches Order or Peace (nor can be consistent with its right Order and Peace.) But such is the Episcopacy which was of late exercised in England, and is now laid by. Therefore, &c.

The Major needs no proof; for few Christians I think, will deny it. If Episcopacy as lately here exercised, be the certain excluder of Government it self and Christs discipline, while it only retains the empty name, then doubtless it is not to be restored.

The Minor I prove thus. If there be a very Natural Impossibility that the late English Episcopacy though in the hands of the best men in the world, should Govern the Churches as Christ hath appointed, and as they should and may otherwise be Governed; then the foresaid inconsistency and destructiveness is apparent. But that there is such a Natural Impossibility for the late English Episcopacy to Govern the Church, thus I shall prove. 1. By showing you what is undoubtedly necessary in Christs Government; 2. And then what was the late English Episcopacy; and then 3. The Impossibility will appear of it self when both these are opened and compared together without any more ado.