was the Will of GOD that such an Officer as a â—shop over Presbyters should be in the House â— GOD that they might obey him in the LORâ— 3. The Apostle in the following Words giveâ— Warning that after his Departure grievous Wolvâ— shall enter in among them not sparing the Flock aâ— verse 30. of their own selves shall Men arise speaâ—ing perverse things to draw away Disciples after theâ— Yet for all this Danger he giveth no Direction set up a Bishop over other Ministers for presâ—ving the Flock nor any Intimation that it wâ— the Will of GOD to provide such a Remedy aâ—terwards But requireth the Pastors to Watch aâ— commendeth them to GOD and the Word of hâ— Grace which was able to Build them up wheâ— by we may see they are remitted to the word for Dâ—rection in what concerneth his Church and nâ— to invent without the Word a Remedy of theâ— own devising 4. From the same Scripture â— are also instructed that the instituted Pastors â— the Church are to feed and take heed unto all â— Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath maâ— them Overseers And therefore Gospel-Ministeâ— are to have no greater Charge than such as thâ— may perform all the Duties belonging to a Pastoâ— to all the Flock And if any Minister assumâ— greater Charge than he can perform these Duâ— unto then it is not that Charge that the Holy Ghâ— hath committed to him If it be said that the Bishop feedeth the Flock â— his Substituts such as he is pleased to appoint Answ But quo jure by what Right or Authoâ—ty can he substitute another to do that which he â—th assumed for his own Work and personal Perâ—rmance it was a doubt that the learned Sir Franâ— Bacon said he could never be resolved of how a Man that had a Trust committed to him for his perâ—nal Faithfulness could delegate that Trust to another â—d if a Bishop say he never engaged to Feed so â—any then it may be justly replyed he was never â—astor to so many Why then should he presume â—e Title and Name of their Pastor When he â—â—weth it simply impossible for him to Teach â—d Feed them or the twentieth part of them acâ—rding to the Duty of a Pastor It 's also to be observed that as by this and maâ— other Texts the Ministers of the Gospel have â—ual Pastoral Authority de jure so we find in the â—riptures that de facto they are placed in Possessiâ— of this Ministerial-Power and exercise it with â—vine Approbation For Presbyters ordain Miâ—sters as 1 Tim. 4. 14. and are therein approved â— the Apostle Timothy being charged not to neâ—ct the Gift he had thereby received 2. A Comâ—nity of Presbyters exert their Power in Church â—scipline and are required by the Apostle so to â— 1 Cor. 5. 4. and 5. verses This Sentence was â—icted by many not by one assuming the sole Power of Jurisdiction to himself which is câ—sonant to our Saviours Doctrine Matth. 18. 1â— who requireth the offended Brother to tell â— Church not a single Person if Christ had coâ—mitted the Power of Discipline to One than â— Complaint of the offended Brother should hâ— been to that One for to whom should he Coâ—plain but to such as had Power to do him Justiâ— and remove the Offence But we see Christ's â—pointment is not to make Application to One â— to the Church Therefore it 's no Institution Christ that authoritative Church-Power be loâ—ed in one Person So also we find that Presbyters are Constituâ— Members of that famous Juridical Synod at Jeâ—salem Acts 15. the Apostles and Elders came to â—ther to consider the Matter in which Assemâ— there is not one found to Over-rule the Rest â— assuming a negative Voice Though some presâ— had more just Authority in the Church than â— now on Earth can pretend to yet all had fâ— liberty to speak their Judgement and all carâ— by Suffrages and that which was concluded plâ—ed the Apostles and Elders and is published in â— Name of the Apostles and Elders whereby it's parent that in the Apostles time Presbyters â— in the actual exercise of Church-Government â—therwise the Decrees of the Synod had never â— published in their Name We shall not at prâ— multiply Arguments but let these three be duely â—nsidered 1. That the Office of a Prelate canâ—t be found in the Roll of Church-Officers 2. â—rists Discharging his Ministers to be one of â—em Greater than another And 3. The Diâ—e Institution of parity among Ministers Object Timothy and Titus are called Bishops in â— Bibles therefore Bishops are by Divine Instiâ—tion Answ All Gospel Pastors are Bishops accorâ—g to the Word of GOD and therefore tho' â—ey were Bishops which cannot be granted â—t the Episcopal Cause gaineth nothing because â—shops above Presbyters are never found in our â—bles 2. These Postscripts to the 2d Epistle to Tiâ—thy and the Epistle to Titus are not Canonick â—ripture but added several Ages after the Canon Scripture was closed and after the Church beâ—n to degenerat which is irrefragably evinced Mr Pryn in his Unbishoping of Timothy and â—us and is acknowledged both by Papists and â—ers that the most antient Copies have no such â—stscripts and therefore our Bibles have these â—stscripts still at some distance from the rest of â—se Epistles But the Difference is not altogeâ—er so observable now as formerly when these â—stscripts were purposely Printed in very smal â—aracters to make the Difference discernable by all who read them 3 Timothy is expresly â—led an Evangelist 2 Tim. 4. 5. and therefore coâ— not be a Bishop neither in Scripture sence aâ— Pastor to a particular Flock whom he might pâ—sonally oversee nor in the Prelatical sence as a â—ocesan Bishop because an Evangelist was noâ—â—mited to any particular bounds as hath been cleâ—ed already And to say that Timothy was Bishâ— of Ephesus is against reason for Timothy was pâ—sent with the Apostle Paul when he commitâ— the Charge of the Flock to the Presbyters in coâ—mon but no mention of Timothy as their Bishopâ— whom the Charge had chiefly belonged if he hâ— been the only Bishop of Ephesus As for Titus he was employed in the like Gâ—pel-Service from one place to another as Timâ— was But it 's said Tit. 15. That he was left in Cretâ— ordain Elders in every City therefore he had Episâ—pal Jurisdiction Answ 1. Timothy and Titus were both exâ—ordinary Officers in the Church as appears â— their constant Travels from place to place thâ— Work being to erect Churches and plant Bishâ— or Presbyters in these Churches but not to Bishops of them themselves their Power beâ— greater than ordinary Bishops or Pastors as is â— served by Chrysostom on Eph. 4 that their Work â— to plant Churches and Bishops or Elders to be theiâ—â—dinary Pastors 2. Seing Titus was to ordain Elâ—ers in every City of Crete then where was his own â—iocess For it cannot be supposed that he did â—rdain himself Bishop of one of these Cities 3.
willingly accept but when he spâ— without them with his good leave he would dissent â— well knew that the best of sinfull Men were Fâ—lible and no Man to be followed further then â— was a follower of Christ 2. When it 's said that the Fathers do generalâ— assert Episcopacy was in the Church it will nâ— thence follow that they asserted it should be the Church it 's one thing to affirm that in thâ— and the other place there were Bishops over Preâ—byters but another thing to affirm there was Dâ—vine Institution for such Prelacy there 's vast diffâ—rence between the two and where this is not aâ—verted the Testimonies of the Fathers are bâ— wrested and perverted as if they all approved Prelacy because they make mention of Bishop For 3. We shall find the choise of the Fathers â—claring that from the beginning it was not so aâ— that the Difference between Bishop and Presbâ—ter came in to the Church by Custom but by â— Divine Appointment That the Church in â— primitive times after the Apostles was governâ— and should be governed by the common Couâ— â—f Presbyters and therefore we are willing they â—pear and speak for themselves knowing they and up for us more than for you Palycarp Epist ad Philip. perswadeth the Peoâ—e to Obey their Presbyters as Christ We are not â—ncerned in his manner of Expression if it appear â—yperbolick this being sufficient to us that his â—xhortation is to obey Presbyters in the Lord but â—t Bishops over Presbyters Ignatius Epist ad Trallens requireth the People subject to the Presbytry calling it Gods Court. Ireneus lib. 4. cap. 44. it becometh you to be Oâ—diâ—nt to Presbyters who have their succession from the â—postles And in his Epistle to Victor called Bishop of â—ome he hath these Words The Presbyters of Rome whom you have succeeded This Epistle and this â—ententence in it is quoted by Euseb lib. 5. cap. 23. â—hereby it 's evident that all the Bishops of Rome the second Century were but Presbyters in Ireâ—us his Judgement Tertull. Apolog. cap. 30. calleth Presbyters preâ—ents of the Churches Praesident probati quique Senioâ— Theophylact. in Philip. 1. affirms that whiles the â—postles lived the Names of Bishops and Presbyters â—ere not distinguished Chrysostom commenting on the same Scripture â—clareth himself to be of the same mind Jerom is more plain then pleasant insisting length in the Probation of his known Assertiâ— that Bishops over Presbyters are not by Diviâ— Institution for which he quoteth many Texts aâ— Commenting on the first cap. to Titus saith a Prâ—byter is the same with a Bishop and before that Faâ—ons did arise in Religion by the instinct of the Devil â— Churches were governed by the common Council of Prâ—byters It 's strange that this Discourse of Jeroâ— escaped an index expurgatorius confidering hâ— Bellarmin and others fret when ever it 's mentioâ—ed it 's so plain and full against the Divine Rigâ— of Prelacy That some of them spare not to saâ— the Good Old Father erred But he goeth onâ— his Epistle to Euagr. and saith let Bishops know thâ— it 's rather by Custom then by the Lords Appointmâ— that Bishops are above Presbyters Ambrose on Eph. 4. saith that Bishops were set â—bove Presbyters by a Council But giveth no accouâ— of the time and place of that Council Howevâ— that same which he saith sufficeth because suppâ—sing it were enacted by a Council then the preâ—tion was but by Humane Authority August Epist 19. confesseth that it was but by present Custom of the Church that Bishops were greâ—er than Presbyters Gregor Naz. orat 28. wisheth the utter Abolâ—on of Prelacy calling it a Tyrannical Government Theodoret. commenting on Phil. 1. saith tâ— these Bishops mentioned in the Text were Presbyters Oecumenius commenting on the same text deâ—lareth himself of the same mind Chrysostom commenting on Hebrews saith â—at Heb. 13. 17. made always his Soul to tremble â—hen he thought on it and Homil. 34. page 602. falâ—th a wondring if a Bishop can be saved any of them â—peciallie whoâ—are greedy of so great a Charge Hom. â— page 627. he calleth them miserable Wretches who â—esire it for saith he thou must give an account of all â—hom thou Rulest these are the words of Chrysoâ—om Basil de Spir. Sancto saith that by Ambition to overnall all Church Government came to nothing Many mo ' might be added but we suppose ye â—ill think these too many speaking at this Rate It should also be observed that Bishops of old â—mmonly had no greater Charge then they could â—ersonally oversee So Euseb lib. 10. cap. 4. saith expresly that a Bishop â—d no greater Charge then he could take personal notice their Souls And lib. 6. cap. 29. saith that an 236. the faithfull in Rome did meet together in one place chuse another Bishop in Place of Anterus Cyprian lib. 2. epist 5. When a Bishop was to Chosen the whole Body of the People were called toâ—her that he might be Elected before all their eyes and the suffrage of the whole Fraternity Here are two â—ings to be Noted that the Body of the People Elected their own Bishop next that the People whom the Bishop was to take Charge could meâ— together in one place One Bishop had common â— but one Altar or Communion Table so that oâ— Bishop now after the New Model taketh a greaâ—er Charge than would have well served twenâ— yea fourty in former times Primat Vsher in his Relig. of Irish saith that Pâ—trick Planted in Ireland 365. Churches and as mâ—ny Bishops and that afterward in Malachias tiâ— the Bishops were more multiplied Let that numbâ— be compared with the present number of Bishoâ— in Ireland And then let the Reader Judge wâ— hath the greatest regard to Antiquity or who tâ— Bishops are that are most capable to Dischargeâ— Pastoral-Duty to the Flock whether few aboâ— twenty in a Nation or many hundreds And if â— will not regard the account given by Mr. Clerks and others though convincingly demonstratâ— that many Bishops lived so near to one anotheâ— and their Sees so contiguous that their Charâ— could not exceed the Bounds of an ordinary Parisâ— and that many of them were Bishops of Villagâ— yet ye will take notice of your Friend Mr. Fulâ— who saith that Bishops of Old were set too thick for â— to grow Lydda Jamina and Joppa being Episcopâ— Towns and all of them within 3 or 4 Miles of othâ— For Bishops had then their Sees in Poor Contemptiâ— Villages And that none may think he speaketh random Sozom. confirmeth the same that Villages â—ad their Bishops lib. 7. cap. 19. Object But the Church upon mature Delibeâ—ation found it expedient to invest some with â—ower and Authority over many others for preâ—enting or healing of Divisions and keeping all in Unity and good Order Answ The most knowing and moderat of the â—piscopal Perswasion take Sanctuary here and â—resume no higher alledging the Church was â—onstrained to it for compescing turbulent Huâ—ors and
all People we knoâ— Dissenters in this Diocess do most need sucâ— help the weakest of them being often accoâ—ed with Questions more proper for studied Dâ—vines than poor Countrey-People and if thâ— Answers of these poor People do not relish â—â— shall have it published that the Dissenters here are a most ignorant People insulted over and exposed to Contempt Therefore we thought it necessary in our Circumstances because of our Love to the Truth and to the Weakest â—â— these who adhere to it to afford what Heâ—â— we could Acknowledging that this presâ—â— Undertaking might have been performed â—â— greater Advantage by some abler Pen which iâ— hoped will yet be done but whatever weaknes appear in this little Tractat shall not be imputable to many but to some of those to whom the Authors Admonition was Directed and therebâ— concerned to exoner their Conscience by making it appear that neither trifling Scruplâ— Peevishness nor perverse Obstinacy but meer â—y that our Consciences cannot be stretched to â—he Latitude that others take in the VVorship of GOD hath procured the following Resoâ—ution to the Authors Query If it be displeasing to him it 's that which we could not prevent but himself might have prevented it by permitting us to Live in Peace without such Queries For he could not but foresee our Answer would be conformed to our own Principles and Practice though we have no Pleasure in provocking him or any other being desirous to live Quiet and Peaceable in the Land giving thanks to GOD the Author of all Good and to his Majesties Clemency under whose happy Government we enjoy Protection and to whom we owe most entire Acknowledgements of Gratitude which we are desirous to testifie on all Occasions and at this present are confident that when many are found Guilty of these execrable Conspiracies to take away his Precious Life there shall not one of our Principles be stained with Disloyalty but all in a cheerfull readiness for his Majesties Preservation and Service There is one thing more that the Reader is desired to Notice that notwithstanding the Exceptions hereafter mentioned stand in the Way of our Communion with the Establisht Church yet we doubt not but many of that Communioâ— are Godly Persons and are known to be of suâ— a Christian-Conversation that we could free partake with them in Gospel-Ordinances pâ—viding we could obtain it without danger of Siâ—ning nor do we take it on us to Judge theâ— for following their own Judgement only â— cannot see with their Eyes nor they with ouâ— but must wait untill GOD reveal it to them wâ— are otherwise minded Perswading our Selâ— that the Sober and Judicious of another Persâ—sion whom we Love and Honour in the LORâ— will not Condemn but rather approve of oâ— Ingenuity in allowing Men to know the weigâ— of these Reasons that binds Us up from tâ— Communion which otherwise we would Coâ— for the Churches Peace This ingenuous Apology is neither for Ostentation nor Irritation but a necessary Vindication of our Practice unto which we are pressed IN laying open Our Exceptions we shall begin with that which is the Root of all these Eclesiastick-Impositious whereby our Consciences are Burdened and our Selves â—hrust out from Communion with You in the â—ublick Worship of GOD Our Ministers and â—heir Ministry is Rejected if they Subscribe not â—o this Article Cannon 36. viz. That the Book of Common Prayer and of Ordering of Bishops Priests â—nd Deacons containeth nothing in it contrary to the â—ord of GOD and that it may Lawfully so be used â—nd that he Himself will use the Form in the said Book â—rescribed in publick Prayer and Administration â—f the Sacraments and none other Here is a plain and full Extrusion of all Miniâ—ers who are not for Bishops over Presbyters for â—he Canon mentioneth only such Bishops or will â—se any other Form in Prayer than the Service â—ook to this Form of Service the People must â—lso subject for no other Church-Communion is allowed them but where these are Consented uâ— to But this our Consciences being Directed bâ— the Word of GOD cannot Comply with coâ—plaining of it as a most heavy Imposition And this Jurisdiction of Bishops over Presbyters is the Ground of our first Exception and thâ— because the Office of a Bishop having Authoriâ— over other Ministers of the Gospel is not founâ— in the Scriptures and therefore wanteth Diviâ— Institution And if such a Bishops Commission â— not found there then We are not obliged to suâ—ject to him as an Officer in the House of GOD Such therefore as will stand on no lower Grounâ— for Prelacy in the Church than Scriptural-Authâ—rity are obliged to make it appear And We dâ—sire no more but direct us to any Scriptures whâ— this Commission is granted if this could be doâ— ye would not only save us a Labour of proving Negative but should also find us as comformabâ— in Point of Subjection as any of your own Coâ—munion but after frequent and according â— our Measure serious reading the Book of GOD We could never yet observe a Bishop set ovâ— Presbyters but We frequently find that a Bishoâ— Presbyter are one office as hereafter shal appeaâ— Reason 1. If Christ had instituted the Offiâ— of a Prelate or Bishop over Presbyters then tâ— said Office would be mentioned in some of theâ— Scriptures which designedly giveth an accountâ— all Church-Officers in the Gospel-Church But in none of these Scriptures is there any mention of a Prelate or Bishop over Presbyters Therefore Christ hath not instituted the said Office For the first Proposition that if there were Institution for such an Officer he would be mentioned in these Scriptures is evident because the Apostle setteth himself to shew what Offices Christ had set in his Church both Extraordinary and Ordinary And who dare say that the Apostle failed in the Enumeration being inspired by the Holy Ghost and how can it be imagined that so eminent a Church-Officer making so great a Figure in the Church could be omitted was it not of great Importance for the Church of GOD in all succeeding Generations to know if there was One appointed to have Authority over many other Ministers without whose placet they should â—either have Power to Ordain other Ministers â—or Govern their Flocks If Christ had instituted such an Officer would he not have given some â—ntimation of Him That other Ministers might â—ave known it was their Duty conscientiously to Obey Him But we have no where any such Intiâ—ation from Christ or any of his Apostles but the contrary as shall appear And that a Bishop over Presbyters is invisible â—y any of these Scriptures where Church-Officers are purposely enumerated the Reader shall havâ— them in ready and full view 1 Cor. 12. 28. And GOD hath set some in thâ— Church first Apostles secondary Prophets thirdly Teachers after that Miracles then Gifts of Healinâ— Helps Governments Diversities of Tongues Rom. 12. 6. Having then Gifts differing accordinâ— to the Grace
that is given to us whither Prophecy let â— Prophecy according to the proportion of Faith or Minâ—stry let us wait on our Ministry or he that Teacheâ— on Teaching or he that Exhorteth on Exhortation â— that Giveth let him do it with Simplicity he that Ruâ—eth with Diligence he that sheweth Mercy with Cheeâ—fulness Ephes 4. 11. And he gave some Apostles anâ— some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pâ—stors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints fâ— the Work of the Ministry for the Edifieing of the Bâ—dy of Christ As for any other Scriptures alledged to favour thâ— Episcopal Cause they shall be considered in theiâ— due place But these Scriptures now mentioneâ— are the places that all Church-Officers do ordinarily betake themselves unto who are willing tâ— have their Commission and Title tryed by thâ— Word of GOD because by them we are particulaâ—ly instructed Who they are whom GOD hath sâ— in his Church and in what order as first secondâ—rily c. now let the Reader demonstrate a Bishoâ— over Presbyters by any of these Scriptures and â—e shall not want reverence let him appear and â—ell us plainly where he fixeth his claim for he will â—ot for Truth and Modesties sake challenge all â—hese Offices and Gifts to be his and some of them â—eing now out of his reach and ceased as Miâ—acles Gifts of Healing and Diversities of Tongues â—t's agreed that all these may be laid aside from â—his Debate as Extraordinary Some of the Offiâ—es mentioned are too low for a Bishop being the â—owest Set of Church Officers as Deacons under â—he Denomination of Helps giving with Simplicity â—nd Cheerfulness neither will these be concerned â—n this Debate We shall come then to the Highest and First in â—he Roll the Apostles being set down first and Biâ—hops now the First and Highest in the Church â—ere some of them fix their Claim as Successors â—o the Apostles and plead it with all earnestness â—ut no successe for lack of Arguments and the â—eight of Arguments against it and that VVe be â—ot amused with big and ambiguous Words not â—nderstood We crave that Justice of those who â—aintain this Apostolick succession to let us know â—hat they understand by it if it be that Prelats â—â— the Gospel-Church have succeded to the intire â—ffice of Apostles or 2d if they have fucceded unâ—o the Doctrine of the Apostles or 3d. unto such â—ospel-Administrations performed by the Apostles as were necessary to continue in the Gospâ— Church as Preaching administration of Sacrameâ— Discipline c. or 4th if by Apostolick Succâ—sion they understand Apostolick Institution Tâ— is such as have Commission from Christs Apostlâ— to Feed his Flock If the first of these be affirmed that Bishops â—ver Presbyters succeed to the Apostles intire Offâ— Then First we have many moe Apostles than eâ— Christ did Institute for all Diocesan Bishops mâ— be Apostles 2. Then they have all immediat Commissiâ— from Christ as all the Apostles had For we mâ— see that when one Apostle was wanting the Detâ—mination who should fill his Room the immeâ—at Decision thereof was left to GOD by Lots â— Acts 1. When Mathias was appointed to take pâ— of the Apostleship from which Judas fell by Traâ—gression This manner of Election our Bishops wâ— not pretend 3. If Bishops Succeed to the very Office aâ— Commission of Apostles then they are infallible Doctrine and may write Canonick Scriptuâ— which their modesty will not challenge 4. If Bishops succeed the Apostles Office thâ— shall all lose their Diocesses for the Apostles â— no Diocess but the wide World they had no liâ—ted Bounds but the Bishop is restricted by Lâ— limited Bounds for as Diocesan his Power extenâ—eth no further then the circumscribed Diocess â—hereof he is Bishop Secondly If it be said that Apostolick Successiâ— is by succeeding to their Doctrine then all Gosâ—el-Ministers have the same claim for they also reach the same Doctrine feeding the Flock with â—e same sincere Milk of the Word So that eâ—ery faithfull Gospel-Pastor preaching sound Doâ—rine neither Corrupting Diminishing nor Adâ—ing to the Word of GOD may put in his Claim â—r this Kind of Succession And that with greatâ— confidence than such as make Additions of doâ—rinal significative Ceremonies of their own Inâ—ention For the third manner of Succession to these Goâ—el-Administrations which were to continue in the â—urch tho' performed by the Apostles Consider â— First That all Gospel-Ministers partake equalâ— of that manner of Succession As they are Paâ—rs entrusted by Christ with the feeding of his â—ock Let the Maintainers of imparity among â—ospel-Ministers shew a Difference or what Miâ—sterial Acts are reserved to some and denied to â—hers 2. These Gospel-Administrations now to be â—erformed by the ordinary Pastors of the Church â—ke not their Original Authority from the Apoâ—olick Office but from Christs Commission and Precepts to the Pastors of his Church to perfoâ— these Ministerial Acts the Pastor being a distiâ— Officer in the House of GOD dependeth not â— the Apostolick Office nor is there any need for â— Because the Pastor hath his Commission distiâ— from the Office of an Apostle though the mattâ— of their Administrations in some things coincidâ— yet that maketh not the two distinct Offices coiâ—cide the Pastors Office being entire by it self the Gospel Charter Fourthly If by Apostolick Succession be meaâ— only Apostolick Institution that is that these aâ— the Apostles Successors whom the Apostles dâ— Institute and Appoint to be the Pastors of tâ— Church This manner of Succession we acknoâ—ledge to be most firm and therefore whosoevâ— can instruct their Office in the Church to be Apostolick Institution have the true Right aâ— Title and therefore shall now most willingly joâ— Issues for its Trial knowing that Bishops ovâ— Presbyters were never instituted by the Apostlâ— as shall hereafter appear Object Some Bishops can draw the line of â—piscopal Succession from the Apostles days unâ— this day Answ A line of Episcopal Succession that is the Succession of Diocesan Bishops for its Bishoâ— of that new Cut Model who are concern'd this Debate such a Line of Succession can no Mâ— draw from the Apostles Times The Reason is obâ—ious because there were no Diocesses and thereâ—ore no Diocesan Bishops long after the Apostles â—imes For the first three Centuries the Church was under Heathnish Persecutors incapable of aâ—y Diocess for a Bishop and therefore Euseb commonly calleth the Bishop a Bishop of a Parish the Church knew not what a Diocess was before Conâ—tantin appeared and then began to follow the Mode of the Civil Government 2. Tho' a Line of Succession could be drawn from the Apostles Times that is of Scriptural Bishops having no greater Charge then they could personally oversee Yet as this maketh nothing for Diocesan-Bishops so it proveth nothing of Apostolick Succession because a Succession from the Apostles Times can never prove a Succession to the Apostolick Office the one cannot infer the other Object Some Apostles came
to be Bishops of Cities and from thence an Episcopal Line of Succession is drawn not only from their Times but from their Persons Answ That Apostles were Bishops of any Ciâ—y or Diocess is false because they were not limited to any certain place as all Diocesan Bishops are and therefore it implyes a Contradiction that they were limited and not limited But if any shall say it will make no Contradiction to be limited in one Respect and unlimited in another Râ—spect that is the Apostles Charge might be limâ—ted as they were Bishops but unlimited as theâ— were Apostles Answ This Distinction leaveâ— the Difficulty untouched and is but a begging â— the Question to suppose they had any limiteâ— Charge as Bishops which can never be proveâ— by Scripture Reason or Antiquity For 2. No Man had Power to restrict their Chargâ— whom Christ had left free 3. As no other Men had Power to alter or makâ— narrower Limits to the Apostolick Charge so neâ—ther had they Power themselves to alter theiâ— own Commission by being bound as Pastors â— Bishops of a particular Charge For thereby theâ— should be disabled to discharge the general Coâ—mission of Preaching and Planting Churchâ— through the World 4. This were a degrading of the Apostolicâ— Office to reduce it to the Office of a Bishop or Pâ—stor therefore ignominious to the Apostles bâ—sides the confounding of these two most distinâ— Offices of Apostle and Pastor by all which it is aâ— parent that a Bishop over Presbyters hath no claiâ— to that Office by Succession to Apostles and tâ— maxime holdeth sure Apostolo in quantum est Apâ—stolus non succeditur All the rest of the Sacred Roll of Church-Oâ—ficers shall be easily dispatched For Prophets who are twice enrolled next to the Apostles will sustain no Debate whether Propheâ—ying be taken more strictly for predicting things â—o come or more largely for opening the Mysteâ—ies of Religion or expounding the Scriptures For in the first sence Bishops are so Modest as not â—o claim it Though some had that extraordinaâ—y Gift in the Apostles times In the second sence â—t importeth no Authority over other Ministers and therefore can do them no service The next are Evangelists but nothing can deâ—cend from that Office for the Office of Bishops because it 's agreed on all Hands that Evangeâ—ists were the Apostles Adjuvants travelling from â—lace to place on Gospel-Service without any fixâ—d residence either in Parish or Diocess and thereâ—ore no claim is made to that for it would deprive â—hem of a fixed Diocess As for Teachers since teaching of it self implyâ—th no Authority over other Teachers it can yeild â—o Argument for Episcopal Authority whither â—y these Teachers be understood such Doctors of â—ivinity as are set a-part for instructing and preâ—aring others for the Ministerial Calling or for â—xplaining of Scriptures neither of them can â—rove Authority over others of the same Office â—d therefore is not pleaded As for Pastors we acknowledge these to be the â—dinary established Ministers of the Gospel unto whom the Charge of Feeding the Flock is coâ—mitted and these in Scripture are called Bishoâ— or Presbyters all of them by the Gospel-Chartâ— under one Commission for equal Authority and Power in the Church as hereafter GOD willing shaâ— plainly appear As for Governments and these who Rule whâ— come in among the last of the Roll they are dâ—stinct Officers in the Church being neithâ— Teachers nor Pastors but such as Rule as is â—vident 1 Tim. 5. 17. where they are said to â— worthy of double Honour specially such as Lâ—bour in Word and Doctrine here are Elders tâ— Rule who do not teach and therefore Bishops caâ— not make this Officer their Claim because a Bâ—shop must be apt to teach and if he only Rule anâ— do not Teach Some will be sure to call him Ruling-Elder which he is not fond of As for Ministring and Exhorting they are tâ— low for a Bishops Character and therefore nâ— pleaded By all this Pains taken in searching for a Bâ—shop Superior to Presbyters the candide Readâ— will perceive that we do not willfully blind foâ— our selves but are willing to search the Scripturâ— and be determined by them but in all these Scâ—ptures where Church-Officers are particularly â— numerated there is no such Church-Officer to â—ound as Bishop over other Ministers of the Gâ—pel either in express Words or by any true Consequence from them and therefore we cannot â—ubject to the said office as an Institution of Christ A second Reason shall be taken from the Words â—f our Saviour Luke 2â— 24. And there was also a â—trife among them which of them should be accounted â—e Greatest and He said unto them the Kings of the Gentils exercise Lordship over them and they that exâ—cise Authority upon them are called Benefactors but â—e shall not be so but he that is Greatest among you let â—m be as the Younger and he that is Chief as he that â—oth Serve The paralel place is Matth. 20. 25. and by â—ese Scriptures Christ Dischargeth Prelacy aâ—ong his Servants or that one of them should be â—reater than another Therefore We cannot conâ—orm to it For clearing of this that Christ hath â—rohibited one of his Ministers to be Greater than â—other Consider first that the Apostles tho' generally â—odly Men yet by reason of remaining Corrupâ—on did too much affect Preheminence which â—ised Heat and Strife among them a Disease not â—sily câ—red 2 Christ perceiving this proud Debate rebukâ—h it by shewing it shall not be with them as with â—reat Men of this World in their exercise of â—ordship and Authority for none of them shall be â—reatest or Chief 3. It cannot be said without Violence to tâ—â— Text that Christ doth only reprove the affectiâ— of Greatness tho' that be reproved yet it is nâ— all that is reproved for Superiority it self or oâ— of them to be Greater than another is discharge Christ's Words are it shall not be so the Thing self is forbidden besides the Love of it he shâ— not be Greatest whither he Love it or not Thâ— maketh it evident to be a meer perverting of tâ— Text contrary to our Saviours express Wordâ— when Men say that nothing is here discharged bâ— the Love of Greatness for Christ doth not say tâ— Kings of the Gentiles Love to exercise Authoritâ— but it shall not be so among you but they do eâ—ercise Authority and it shall not be so among yoâ— 4. Nor can it be said that only Tyrannical Dâ—mination is forbidden by these Scriptures becaâ—â— the word here is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth laâ—full Authority and commonly taken in that seâ— so Matth. 8. 9. I am a Man under Authority the same word so also it 's made use of to signiâ— Christs own Power John 17. 2. Thou hast given Hâ— Power over all Flesh so that the same Authorâ— that is lawfull among others yet shall not be uâ—ped by any of his Servants over one another 5. Whatever might be the
â—eing he was to Ordain Elders in the plural numâ—er in every City and by the Scripture these Elâ—ers are Bishops then mo Bishops then one was â— be in every City which is contrare to the Episâ—opal Constitution 4. If it be said that Titus â—as Archbishop or Metropolitan Answ This â—cketh nothing but Proof which no where can â—e had For the primitive Gospel-Church knew â—o such thing as either a Diocesan Bishop Archâ—ishop or Metropolitan long after the Death of â—imothy and Titus there being no certain Rule â—or modeling of Diocesses until the Reign of Conâ—antine the Great at which time the Church did â—ollow the Civil Government as to Diocesses this â—ishop Stilling-fleet maketh out in his Irenic page â—76 377. 5. There is nothing to be found in â—e Scriptures to countenance this Assertion that â—itus was Archbishop of Crete all that can be said is â—at he was sent to Crete upon a piece of special serâ—ice for the Church which made him no more Biâ—op there then when he staid some time in other â—laces Aquinas run into the same Mistake as â—o Dalmatia for because Titus went to Dalmatia â—herefore he calls him the Bishop of Dalmatia 6. â—f it be said that the least that Bishops can Gain from Titus being left to Ordain Elders is that â—shops have sole Power of Ordination seing Tâ— alone ordained Answ This is but to begâ— Question for we deny that Titus was a Bishâ— let that first be proved And 2. That he ordaâ—ed as a Bishop And 3. That he ordained aloâ— For his ordaining of Elders makes him no Bishoâ— no more then the Apostle Pauls ordaining maâ— him a Bishop they ordained as Extraordinaâ— Officers in the Church making way for Bishoâ— or Pastors and though Titus was invested wiâ— extraordinary Power above any Bishop or Pastoâ— yet that it self will not prove that he ordained sâ— paratim without Presbyters Because he was Ordain Elders in the same manner that was the â—stablished Way of the Church in conjunction wiâ— Presbyters as the Apostle Paul did lay his hanâ— on Timothy conjunctim with the Presbytry thâ— is joyntly with a Presbytry Object 2. The Epistles to the seven Church of Asia are directed to the Bishops of these Chuâ—ches because each of them is directed to one siâ—gle Person called the Angel of the Church Answ That these Epistles are directed to tâ— Bishops of these Churches in the Scripture seâ— we easily acknowledge but then no advantaâ— to the Episcopal Cause is gained For if these Aâ—gels be Bishops and Bishops the same with Prâ—byters then ye are just where you were not liâ— â—d one step higher than a preaching Presbyter or â—ospel-Pastor 2. Whereas the Angel is spoken unto in the sinâ—lar number you have no advantage by this either â—r you shall find one and the same Angel spoken â— in the plural number As to the Angel of the â—hurch of Smyrna Rev. 2. 10 The Devil shal cast â—me of you into Prison the Speech is directed unâ— the Angel yet the plural number is used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to â—ew that it 's not one single Person only that is deâ—ted by the Name of Angel so also to the Angel â—f the Church of Thyatira but unto you I say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—ere the Angel is expresly spoken unto in the pluâ—l number So that any Argument from the â—ame Angel utterly faileth you For though an â—gel be named in the singular number yet that by â—e Name Angel is understood a collective Body â— Ministers is evident otherwise let any Man â—nder a Reason why the Angel is spoken to in the â—ural number as mo than one And hereby we â—ve solid ground to think that the Angel is spoâ—n to in the plural number purposly to obviat or â—rrect the Misapprehensions of any who would â—ink that a Bishop over Presbyters is understood â— the Word Angel Object 3 But the Government of the Church â— Bishops having Authority Jurisdiction over â—esbyters is so Antient that we cannot judge it â— any lower Derivation then from the Apostles albeit we have it not by express Scripture Answ 1. If you have such a Government the Church by due consequence from any Scriptuâ— of the New Testament We are ready to yeâ— Subjection albeit ye cannot Prove it by exprâ— Scriptures ye shall not be so hard put to it â— for you only to Affirm and Assert it Apostoliâ— without any Proof cannot convince Mens Judgâ—ments and satisfie their Conscience in a matter so great Importance Your selves being Judge if you have Proof for it make it appear Bishâ— Laud and some other Bishops with him said oâ— publickly if Prelacy were not the Apostolick Gâ—vernment they would forth with throw away thâ— Rotchets But they kept them as long as thâ— could and the Proof went no further upon whiâ— Mr. Pryne did challenge them for breach of Pâ—mise VVhy do ye not stop all our Mouths â—proving your Assertion and so satisfie a great Bâ—dy of Protestants at Home and Abroad Who giâ— Reasons from Scripture contrare to your Asserâ—on And to say it must be Apostolick because its Antiquity is little less then to say we will haâ— it from them whither they will or not their Dâ—ctrine and Practice refuse and yet it must be â—torted from them 2. We have made it appear already that the â—postles did prescribe another Form of Governmenâ— be managed by the Ministers of the Gospel in â— â—ty of Ministerial Power and how to impose uâ—on our own Reason and Belief that by some inâ—isible Prescription they have contradicted all â—is were hard measure should we or can we â—ject what they have Recorded by Inspiration of â—e Holy Ghost and betake our selves to some fanâ—ed Tradition Could this be a safe Way for our â—onsciences Or could we Answer to GOD for â— Your selves being Judges 3. If the Antiquity of Prelacy be at last its only â—ea and strongest Defence Cyprian will soon Anâ—er for us that Antiquity without Verity is but mouldy â—rror and as Sir Francis Bacon termed it a Cypher â—ithout a Figure 2. If this Plea should hold Good then there â— a Door opened for the most Antient Errors â—herewith the Church was infested even in the Aâ—ostles times and such as soon after endangered â—e renting of her Bowels 3. And however Antient Prelacy be found yet may and doth suffice us that it hath no Institution â— the Gospel-Church by Christ or his Apostles â—nd therefore can claim no better than Humane Appointment for which Appointment no Commisâ—n was granted to the Church Object All that is Alledged by you against Eâ—iscopacy is but your own late Sentiments For â—e Antient Fathers who understood the State of â—e Primitive Church better than you do generally bear Testimony that Bishops have been in all Agâ— of the Gospel-Church Answ We are of the same mind with Augâ—stin who being urged with the Authority of â—prian answered That what he spoke according to â— Scriptures he would
the rest he approacheth that â—age and when he hath it purposly straight beâ—re him and near to it he Worshippeth 6. In the mean time he saith I purpose no Worâ—ip to that Image but I Worship GOD before it â—doro Deum sub hac Figura figuratum the Questiâ— thus stated the Doubt is easily resolved and â—t the Reader judge if that manner of Worship â—e not forbidden expresly by the Law of GOD â—d whatever Protestation be against all deference â— the Image if it be not protestatio contraria facto by â—ch a Man Object When we Kneel at the Sacrament we are then Praying to GOD and who can be blâ—ed for Prayer Answ No Christian will be against Prayâ— and in a special manner Men should pray for â— blessing of that Holy Ordinance that they â— have true spiritual Communion with CHRISâ— which is not only to be solemnly performed at Consecration of the Elements but each Comâ—nicant is to be frequent and fervent in Prayer fore they come to the Sacrament Yet Prayeâ— not the proper Work of Communicating in very time when we partake because the Natâ— of the Work is to Meditate and Feed upon Chrâ— receiving him into our Hearts by Faith when receive the Bread and Wine and therefore Prâ—er not being the Communicants immediat Duâ— when he is eating that Bread and drinking of Cup so neither can Kneeling be his present Duâ— Object But we are to Pray always Answ That Praying always is not so to be â—derstood as if we were not to allow time for otâ— Duties differing in their Nature from Prayer are to Believe hear the Word Praise c. these are not prayer so we are to partake of Châ— Body and Blood in the Sacrament yet that pâ— taking is not Prayer It should also be considered that there is gâ— Difference between stated set time for Prayâ— and some speedy Ejaculations to GOD which â— performed without interruption to another â—ty But to turn the Sacrament to a stated â—ayer from the Beginning to the End of Partakâ—g goeth too near the over-turning of the very â—ture of the Sacrament So that it might be justâ— enquired at any Person who Kneeleth all the â—e he Partaketh whither he be Praying all that â—e or not If he say that he was not all that â—e Praying Then it may be demanded why he â—s all that time on his Knees if not about immeâ—at Worship as Prayer if he say that he was all at time in Prayer then it may be said the Man â—th been at Prayer rather than Communicating â—ecause it 's impossible the Man could Communiâ—te aright if he allowed no time for Meditation discerning the LORDS Body and receiving of â—im Spiritually when he received the Bread and â—ine but spent all the time of Partaking in Prayâ— which by its Unseasonableness diverteth the â—oul from its immediat Duty The comfortless Original of Kneeling at the â—ords Supper is also to be remembred coming in â—ith Popish Transubstantiation And Papists do â—et frankly tell the World that if they did not beâ—eve CHRISTS Corporal Presence in the Sacraâ—ent they would allow it no VVorshipping-Poâ—ure Our 4th Exception Is against the Sign of Cross in Baptism because it 's performed as Act of VVorship without Divine Institution Aâ— therefore cannot approve of it as a warrantaâ— Administration but Judge it vain Worship Disâ—proved of GOD. Here are three things to be considered distinâ—ly 1. That as the Sign of the Cross is Used â— Baptism it is Worship 2. That it is VVorsâ— without any Institution of GOD. And 3. Tâ— therefore it is Vnwarrantable For the First that its VVorship is evident â—cause by the Sign of the Cross Persons are soleâ—ly Dedicated to GOD the which Dedication is its own Nature an Act of VVorship For This Dedication is an actual solemn Acknowledâ—ment of GODS Soveraign Dominion Right aâ— Title to the Persons so Dedicated and therefoâ— is present Homage rendred to GOD which VVorship 2ly This Dedication is directed GOD and terminats in Him and therefore is Woâ—ship for a deliberat Solemn Devoting of Persoâ— to GOD cannot be performed without immediâ— Application presenting the Persons to GOD whâ—ther for Blessings or Services otherwise it câ— be no Dedication to Him There can be no Evasion for this nor any Wâ— to Vindicate it from being an Act of VVorshâ— while these who Use the Sign of the Cross oâ— and declare it to be a Dedicating Sign And that the Reader may see this Dedication â—cknowledged take the Bishops own words for it â— his second Admonition Appendix page 25. And â—t only Our Church but all other Christians from the Apostles time have for this Reason looked on making â—e Sign of the Cross as a very fit Instance and Declaâ—tion of their Glorying in CHRISTS Sufferings and â—adiness to follow Him in them which is an effectual â—edication of our selves to his Service This Asserâ—on is highly Uncharitable for if all Christians â—nce the Apostles time have so looked upon the â—ign of the Cross then it followeth that they are â—t Christians who look otherwise on it the Conâ—quence cannot be avoided if this Assertion be â—ue But that which these words are quoted for to prove that the Sign of the Cross is used for a â—edication of People to God which the Canons of â—e Church of England doth also affirm Can. 30. â—he words are so that for the very remembrance of â—e Cross which is very Precious to all them that rightly â—elieve in Jesus Christ and in the other respects mentioâ—ed the Church of England hath retained still the Sign â—f it in Baptism following therein the Primitive and Aâ—ostolical Churches and accounting it a Lawfull outâ—ard Ceremony and honourable Badge whereby the Inâ—ant is Dedicated to the Service of Him that dyed upon â—e Cross as by the words used in the Book of Common-Prayer it may appear No farther Notice shal be taken of these woâ— at present but that they Declare the Sign of â— Cross to be a Dedication of Infants to the Servâ— of CHRIST and this Dedication to GOD beâ— confessed is sufficient to Prove it Worship Offerings made and given to GOD were alwaâ— parts of Worship The second Thing is that this Worship by â— Sign of the Cross is without any Divine Institâ—on which will be acknowledged by all who câ—sider what Divine Institution is and where iâ— to be found If the Scriptures be wholly Silâ— never mentioning never Commanding any sâ— Sign to be Used either by express Words oâ—â—ny true Consequence then it can have no Divâ— Institution But no colour for it can be foundâ— the whole Book of GOD therefore it wantâ— Divine Institution If Men could show any Pâ—scription for it we would Debate it no more But seing the Sign of the Cross in Baptism destitute of all Authority from GOD either â— Precept or Example We cannot but look upâ— it as meer Will-Worship and therefore an â—warrantable Administration in the Church of Gâ— which we cannot Conform
desiring soâ— Knowledge of a Ministers Gifts and godly Coâ—versation before they receive him as their Pastoâ— 2. The possibility of their erring in Election caâ—not deprive them of their Priviledge 3. If thâ— should erre yet their Electing maketh not tâ— Man their Minister untill he be Ordained aâ— if the People have erred then the Ministers mâ— forbear Ordination untill a qualified Person â— Chosen And so both Ministers and People preâ—rve their due Rights And where this is not â—bserved it commonly occasioneth an unprofiâ—ble Ministry and Comfortless both to Minister â—nd People 6. We cannot be of that Communion where â—ur Confession of Faith and Catechisms are publickâ— on all Occasions ridiculed and exposed to Conâ—mpt Is it to be imagined that your selves would â—atiently sit and hear the most important Articles â—f your Religion openly vilified And if ye could â—ot bear it your selves why should ye expect it â—f us Who have Cause to Praise GOD for so Orthodox a summary of the Christian Religion â—s is contain'd in these Books Is it reasonable to â—hink that by our Presence and Silence we should â—ppear to approve the condemning the publick â—tandard of our Religion Your selves being â—udges 7. We are so perswaded of tbe soundness of the Doctrine contained in our Confession of Faith â—nd Catechisms Larger and Shorter that whereâ—oever these are contradicted we have just Cause â—o suspect the hearing of unsound Doctrine and are â—equired by the Word of GOD not to hear the Inâ—truction that causeth to erre from the words of Knowâ—edge We know that the Doctrinal Articles of the Church of Engl. are Sound and we Challenge aâ—y Man that dare say we ever speak of them but with a due regard And it were much to be â—sired that all who make Profession of these Aâ—cles would faithfully Adhere to them in their Dâ—ctrine But in the next Place some Alledge that thouâ— we be not free to Joyn as fixed Members of tâ— Established Church nor could we be received such without Subjection to Episcopal Goverment their Discipline and Ceremonies Yâ— why should we be so shy as not to hear their Miâ—sters at any time we being all of one Faith That the Reader may have Satisfaction Consider First that we are not as Scepticks wâ— have either their Religion or manner of Worshâ— to seek as not knowing what Church-Commuâ—on to chuse For we are both in Judgement aâ— Practice established already what manner of Woâ—ship we should Adhere to And therefore need â— expose our selves as unfixed Some of your selâ— have reproved severely these who are of itchâ— Ears and the Rebuke is directed to us of this Diâ—cess We shall advert to what he hath said aâ— beware of that Evil hoping that while we are câ—tent with hearing of our own we shal not be chaâ—ed with that Guilt of itching for others 2. We desire also it may be remembred tâ— some of yours particularly Dr. Stilling fleet nâ— Bishop hath Published his Reflections agaâ— those of our Communion who at sometimes â— â— hear and Joyn in your Worship Because they â—ntinue not making this the Argument that if we â—ink it Lawfull at sometimes why not at other â—mes and that Constant Communion is due where â—ccasional Communion is allowed But another â—f a great Character in the Defence of his Answer â—o the Case of Protestant Dissenters stated and arâ—ed though under the covert of anothers Name â—ath raised the Censure to such a pitch that they â—ppear to be Men of flexible and profligat Conscienâ—es who at sometimes Joyn in Worship with the â—stablished Church not Resolving to Continue â—ow then can you advise us to Occasional Comâ—union If it be not for this Reason that you â—ay take Occasion to Reproach us as Men of no â—rinciples who will turn and return with the Tide â—f Worldly Interest But belike you may have the â—ss Occasion for this Imputation hereafter this â—eing the best Use ye make of it Can any Man â—f sence judge it a rational Method for drawing us â—o your Communion at any time to tell us it must â—e always otherwise we are but Men of a profligat Conscience It would hereby appear that you desire none of us to come near you and discharge us to Joyn in your Worship as we would not be Stigmatized the next day for profligat Persons 3. Whereas it 's said we are of one Faith it 's well this is acknowledged and long may it be so But some Observe that this is rarely Confessed except when you mind to improve it for an Impâ—taâ—ion that being of one Faith we are thereby oâ—liged to Conformity and wilfully Obstinat in â—fusing it As if our being of one Faith engagâ— us to any manner of Worship you require Coâ—manded of GOD or not But it may be inferrâ— with greater Reason since we are of the saâ— Faith therefore you should make the Door Pâ—tent and admit us freely and not to cast the stuâ—bling Blocks of unprofitable Ceremonies in oâ— Way Which your Selves Know and Confess mâ— be laid aside without Sin But such as we cannâ— Comply with without Sin yet you will not paâ— with one of these useless Ceremonies if we shouâ— never come nearer you But in the last Place that which is urged as moâ— plausible when it appears we cannot be fixâ— Members of your Communion and are not pleâ—ed but rather angry at Occasional Communioâ— that at least when People want Ministers of thâ— own as many of them do often want why do nâ— they then go to the Parish Church why do nâ— your Ministers positively declare their Opinioâ— For Answer to this Consider First That it is the Affliction of many Feareâ— of GOD to want the Benefit of publick Gospeâ— Ordinances every Lords Day we say it's theâ— Affliction but cannot so easily grant that it is thâ— Sin when their circumstantiat Case is such thâ— â—t sometimes they must either want or Wound â—heir Conscience by Joyning in Acts of Worship â—hich they cannot find to be approved of GOD They dare not act as joint Worshippers in these â—ery Acts lest they not only partake of other Mens Sins but be active in sinning themselves Such as are in this Case are rather to be pitied than â—ensured Bishop Stilling fleet hath these remarkâ—ble words in his Irenic page 119. 120. Let Men â—urn and wind themselves which Way they will by â—â—e very same Arguments that any will Prove Sepaâ—ation from the Church of Rome lawfull because She â—quired unlawfull Things as Conditions of Her Comâ—union It will be proved Lawfull not to Conform â—o any suspected or unlawfull Practice required by my Church-Governour upon the same Terms If the â—â—ing so required be after Serious and Sober Enquiry â—dged Vnwarrantable by a Man 's own Conscience Grant but this Liberty allowed by this Learned â—ishop to forbear any Suspected or Unlawfull â—ractice though required by a Church-Goverâ—our And then you will be more sparing in Condemning the Practice of sober Christians whose great