Five disputations of church-government and worship

If in all the New Testament, the word [Church] do often signify stated worshipping single Assemblies, and often is used so as may admit that interpretation; and is never once used certainly to signify many particular stated worshipping Assemblies ruled by ⟨p. 81⟩one fixed Bishop, then we have any just cause to suppose that the particular Political Churches in Scripture times consisted but of one such stated Congregation. But the Antecedent is true, therefore so is the Consequent.

If in all the New Testament, the word [Church] do often signifie stated worshipping single Assemblies, and often is used so as may admit that interpretation; and is never once used certainly to signifie many particular stated worshipping Assemblies ruled by ⟨p. 81⟩one fixed Bishop, then we have any just cause to suppose that the particular Political Churches in Scripture times consisted but of one such stated Congregation. But the Antecedent is true, therefore so is the Consequent.

As for the New Episcopal Divines that say There were no subject Presbyters in Scripture times: I suppose according to their principles, they w•ll grant me all this, as is aforesaid And for others, the Instances that they bring to the contrary should be briefly considered. The great swaying Instance of all (which did sometime prevail with me to be my self of another mind) is the Numerous Church at Jerusalem: Of which its said that three thousand were converted at once, and five thousand at another time, and the word mightily grew and prevailed, and daily such were added to the Church as should be saved: to which some add the mention of the Myriads of believing Jews yet zealous of the Law, which the brethren mentioned to Paul, Acts 21.20. And the instance of Ephesus and Rome come next. But I remember how largely this business is debated between the late Assembly at Westminster and the Dissenting Brethren, that I think it unmeet to interpose in it any further then to annex these few considerations following.