The reasons of the Dissenting Brethren against the third proposition, concerning presbyterial government· Humbly…

The Proof of the whole depends upon this Proposition: for though before the dispersion there had been many Congregations, yet not under Elders, but Apostles: Now it is granted that the substance of Ministerial Acts were one and the same in Apostles and Evangelists who were extraordinary, and in other ordinary Ministers. But first, though for the Act of Ministerial ⟨p. 26⟩power, it was the same in the Apostles, and them, yet in the extent of power (which is the point in question) therein the Apostles Jurisdiction over many Congregations is not the pattern of Presbyterial Elders over many, for the Apostles power was universal over all Churches, and upon that was founded their power over those Congregations supposed many; And Episcopacy may as strongly argue and infer, that because in Crete (by Apostolical warrant) One man [Titus] did ordain Elders, &c. That therefore there may be one man [a Bishop] that hath power to ordain, &c. in and over several Churches. And this Argument will be stronger from the instance of an Evangelist, for Episcopal power then this of Apostolical▪ government, for the Presbyterial, by how much it is the more inferior Office, but that of the Apostles is more immediate and transcendent, and so the power of an Evangelist is nearer to an ordinary succession, and it will as well follow, that any one Presbyter alone might govern many Congregations, because one of these Apostles might, as that because the Apostles did govern these jointly, that therefore many Presbyters over several Congregations may.

The Proofe of the whole depends upon this Proposition: for though before the dispersion there had been many Congregations, yet not under Elders, but Apostles: Now it is granted that the substance of Ministeriall Acts were one and the same in Apostles and Evangelists who were extraordinary, and in other ordinary Ministers. But first, though for the Act of Ministeriall ⟨p. 26⟩power, it was the same in the Apostles, and them, yet in the extent of power (which is the point in question) therein the Apostles Jurisdiction over many Congregations is not the patterne of Presbyteriall Elders over many, for the Apostles power was universall over all Churches, and upon that was founded their power over those Congregations supposed many; And Episcopacie may as strongly argue and inferre, that because in Crete (by Apostolicall warrant) One man [Titus] did ordaine Elders, &c. That therefore there may bee one man [a Bishop] that hath power to ordaine, &c. in and over severall Churches. And this Argument will bee stronger from the instance of an Evangelist, for Episcopall power then this of Apostolicall government, for the Presbyteriall, by how much it is the more inferior Office, but that of the Apostles is more immediate and transcendent, and so the power of an Evangelist is neerer to an ordinary succession, and it will as well follow, that any one Presbyter alone might governe many Congregations, because one of these Apostles might, as that because the Apostles did governe these joyntly, that therefore many Presbyters over severall Congregations may.