Five disputations of church-government and worship

Sect. 15. And therefore though we reverence Eusebius and other Ancients, that tell us of some Apostles Dioceses, we take them not as infallible reporters, and have reason in these points partly to deny them credit from the word of God. The Churches that were planted by any Apostle, or where an Apostle was longest resident, were like enough to reckon the series of their Pastors from him: For the founder of a Church is a Pastor of it, though not a fixed Pastor, taking it as his peculiar charge, but delivering it into the hands of such: And in this sense we have great reason to understand the Catalogues of the Ancients ⟨p. 183⟩and their affirmations that Apostles were Bishops of the Churches. For Pastors they were: but so that they had no peculiar Diocese, but still went on in planting and gathering and confirming Churches: Whereas the Bishops that were settled by them (and are said to succeed them had) their single Churches which were their peculiar charge; They had but one such charge or Church, when the Apostles that lead in the Catalogues had many; & yet none so as to be limited to them. And why have we not the Diocese of Paul and John, and Matthew and Thomas, and the rest of the twelve, mentioned, as well of Peter and James? Or if Paul had any, it seems he was compartner with Peter in the same City (contrary to the Canons that requireth that there be but one Bishop in a City.)

Sect. 15. And therefore though we reverence Eusebius and other Ancients, that tell us of some Apostles Diocesses, we take them not as infallible reporters, and have reason in these points partly to deny them credit from the word of God. The Churches that were planted by any Apostle, or where an Apostle was longest resident, were like enough to reckon the series of their Pastors from him: For the founder of a Church is a Pastor of it, though not a fixed Pastor, taking it as his peculiar charge, but delivering it into the hands of such: And in this sence we have great reason to understand the Catalogues of the Antients ⟨p. 183⟩and their affirmations that Apostles were Bishops of the Churches. For Pastors they were: but so that they had no peculiar Diocess, but still went on in planting and gathering and confirming Churches: Whereas the Bishops that were setled by them (and are said to succeed them had) their single Churches which were their peculiar charge; They had but one such charge or Church, when the Apostles that lead in the Catalogues had many; & yet none so as to be limited to them. And why have we not the Diocess of Paul and Iohn, and Mathew and Thomas, and the rest of the twelve, mentioned, as well of Peter and Iames? Or if Paul had any, it seems he was compartner with Peter in the same City (contrary to the Canons that requireth that there be but one Bishop in a City.)