Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	bishop_n	office_n	presbyter_n	2,819	5	10.5738	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25216	A reply to the Reverend Dean of St. Pauls's reflections on the Rector of Sutton, &c. wherein the principles and practices of the non-conformists are not only vindicated by Scripture, but by Dr. Stillingsfleet's Rational account, as well as his Irenicum : as also by the writings of the Lord Faulkland, Mr. Hales, Mr. Chillingworth, &c. / by the same hand ; to which is added, St. Paul's work promoted, or, Proper materials drawn from The true and only way of concord, and, Pleas for peace and other late writings of Mr. Richard Baxter ...	Alsop, Vincent, 1629 or 30-1703.; Barret, John, 1631-1713.	1681 (1681)	Wing A2919; ESTC R6809	123,967	128

esse ●isi verbo Dei And then it would be seriously enquired whether to require Assent and Consent to another Book besides the Bible a Book in Folio and to all things contained in it be not to have Dominion over Mens Faith Many are in doubt here whose doubts you have not so far as I can perceive yet resolved You your self must grant that the Churches of God have or should have no such Custom to tyrannize over the Faith and Consciences of Men that is Lording it indeed As here Vnreas of Separat p. 184. You cite M. Claude allowing or maintaining Tyranny over Mens Consciences to be a justifiable Reason of S●paration And Le Blanc p. 185. And the Confession of Strasburg p. 188. That they look on no human Traditions as condemned in Scripture but such as are repugnant to the Law of God and bind the Consciences of Men. And Io● Crocius ib. Ceremonies forbidden break the Churches Unity yet its Communion is not to be forsaken for one or two of these if there be no Tyranny over the Consciences of Men. And Bishop Daven●nt p. 189 190. Who grants that Tyranny over Mens Faith and Consciences would be a s●fficient Reason to hinder Communion As he says Sentent D. Dav. p. 6. If some one Church will so have Dominion over the Faith of others that she acknowledgeth none for Brethren or admits none into Communion with her nisi credend● ac loquendi legem ab eadem prius accipiant the Holy Scripture forbids us thus to make our selves the Slaves of any Mortals whosoever they are our one only Master Christ forbids Quae hâc lege in Communionem alterius Ecclesiae recipitur non pacem inde acquirit sed iniquissimae servitutis pactionem Here I set down a little more than you cite as indeed it was not for your purpose To these you agree P. 221. Not but that I think there may be a Separation without Sin from a Society retaining the Essentials of a Church but then I say the Reason of such Separation is some heinous Error in Doctrine or some idolatrous Practice in Worship or some Tyranny over the Consciences of Men c. This Tyranny over Conscience with you is an imposing of unlawful things Which I infer from those Words p. 208. A prudent and due submission in lawful things lies between Tyranny over Mens Consciences and endless Separation With Bishop Davenant it is credendi ac loquendi legem dicere Now if this be the Case of Non-conformist Ministers that others would tyrannize over their Consciences will it not justify their Separation which is but a Separation secundum quid And if you deny this to be their Case be pleased to give a sound and solid Answer to those few Pages of the second Plea for Peace towards the end p. 116 c. Qui tyrannidem in Christianissimum vel usurpat vel invehit ille Christum quantum potest ê solio dejicit c. Amyrald in Thes. Salmur p. 435. §22 8. Will you say every Man is bound for Peace-sake to submit to the Determination of Church-Governours whatever his private Iudgment may be When his Judgment may be that such a Determination is against the Word tho never so many Churches and Councils judg otherwise And when his Judgment may be that submission to such Determination of Men would be real Disobedience and acting contrary to the Will of God If his Conscience be rightly informed then he opposeth the Authority of Scripture and the Iudgment of God to the Iudgment of Men as Chillingworth says p. 309. which is certainly allowable If his Conscience and Judgment be erroneous yet he must suspend the act of Submission to such Determination till he can be better informed or acting here against his Iudgment and Conscience tho erroneous he would greatly sin As suppose the Governours of the Church to have determined that we shall all declare our Assent unto that in Preface before the Book of Ordination That it is evident unto all Men diligently reading Holy Scripture and Ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church Bishops Priests and Deacons as several Officers You could not have submitted to such Determination while your Judgment was the same as when you wrote your Irenicum This is evident from what I noted thence Rector of Sutton p. 41 66. Nothing can be more evident than that it rose not from any divine Institution c. Could you have dissembled with God and Man for Peace-sake But more of this afterwards But I am thinking you may possibly object That you speak of things supposed to be left undetermin'd whereas I Instance here in a matter that the Word determines Yet I hope this may be more convincing Let us for this once suppose that you could now prove from Scripture that the Bishops Office is distinct from that of Presbyters yet I hope you will grant me that you could not have submitted to such Determination of the Church while you believed no such thing And then I have what I would have Every Man cannot lawfully submit to the Churches Determination though it be according to the Scripture that is so long as his Judgment is the Determination is without and against Scripture then must not the same be said of such Determination as is besides the Scripture I know you will not say the Churches Word is above God's So you see how this part of your Rule falls short of what you aim at One thing you have under this Rule Irenic p. 124. I should take a little notice of some-where and let me do it here There must be a Difference made say you between the Liberty and Freedom of a Man 's own Judgment and the Authority of it So by being under Governours a Man parts with the Authority of his Iudgment but you would not have him deprived of the Liberty and Freedom of his Judgment otherwise to what purpose is this distinction brought Now I would not be so uncharitable as to think that by the Liberty of a Man 's own Iudgment you could mean a Liberty of professing and declaring contrary to his own Judgment in Submission to the Determination of Church-Governours for the Churches Peace And therefore I say your Rule here is short and reacheth not to our Case 2. You say in this last Conclusion that in M●tters of meer Order and Decency every one for the Churches Peace is bound to submit to the Determination of the lawful Governours of the Church Here 1. This is readily granted if by Matters of meer Order and Decency you understand Matters of meer Order and Decency As you seemed to understand no more when you wrote your Iren. For there you distinguish betwixt Ceremonies and Matters of meer Decency and Order for Order-sake And you further say that Matters of Order and Decency are allowable and fitting but Ceremonies properly taken for Actions significative their Lawfulness may with better Ground

40. you speak of an unaccountable Separation without regard to the greatness or smalness of Parishes c. doth not that imply that there may be some Account given for assembling to worship God where there is a regard to this to the Abilities and Piety of Ministers and to the Peace and Order of the Church And therefore the thing is not so unreasonable as you would make it 2. What if I prove in examining your Three Conclusions from the Principles you lay down in your Irenicum and Rational Account too that many are necessitated to separate from your Communion Is Separation unreasonable when necessary Or will you allow others to say that there you have pleaded for unreasonable Separation 2. An Impartial Account c. you call it Here I might say I was glad to see you promising Impartiality in this Work having found so little of it in your Sermon but upon search Quantâ de spe decidi The Partiality you have discovered is so great and in so many Particulars that if I should ransack every Corner of your Book as you speak to collect all such Passages I fear I should be very tedious and irksome to you and other Readers But 1. May not some of the common People who have read either what Mr. Baxter says of it or Mr. Newcomen in Serm. on Nov. 5. 1642. take you to be partial in setting down the Jesuit Contzens Directions for reducing Popery Preface pag. 19 20. In that you take no notice of putting out of Honours Dignities and publick Offices such as are most adverse to Popery or of the outing of Ministers as unpeaceable proud obstinate disobedient to Magistrates And forbidding them privately or publickly to assemble And take no notice of that How easie is it as he says in England to bring the Puritans into Order if they be forced to approve of Bishops c. Here I think of your Words pag. 10. I do not say such Men are set on by Iesuits but I say they do their work as effectually So it would be considered whether such Methods do not effectually promote the Jesuits design of reducing Popery You may give us to understand Preface pag. 22. that the Declaration of Indulgence 167½ was of the Papists procuring but we must not say that the turning out of many zealous Protestant Justices and Ministers was any way by their means 2. Are you impartial in the Account you give of the Reformation in King Edward 6 and Q. Elizabeth's Raign Did the Reformation lie in those things wherein Dissenters differ from you Then you must say that those Churches which aimed at an exact Conformity with the Apostolick Times and as Chillingworth says took their Direction only from Scripture were yet so far unreformed as they wanted our Ceremonies Though it soundeth very harshly to say that those Churches who were more conformed to the Scripture Rule were less reformed But you spake more impartially and more to the honour of our First Reformers Irenic pag. 124. which you was minded of Rector of Sutton p. 6. Certainly those holy Men who did seek by any means to draw in others c. And by that Rubrick which left it at the discretion of the Minister what and how much to read when there was a Sermon it is evident others since have sought to bear up their Authority by their Names who have been far from their Moderation I cannot but wonder at your Harangue Book pag. 6. Is it credible that Men of so great Integrity such indefatigable Industry such profound Iudgment as Cranmer and Ridley who were the Heads of the Reform●tion should discern no Sinfulness in these things Could not Latimer or Bradford or such holy mortified Men as they discern so much as a Mote of Vnlawlawfulness c. It is granted they were Learned Pious Excellent Men yet it need not seem strange much less incredible that such worthy Men should in some things mistake Does not A. B. Laud tell you Reformation is so difficult a Work and subject to so many Pretentions that 't is almost impossible but the Reformers should step too far or fall too short in some smaller things or other I suppose you may have Bishop Cranmer's Manuscript still by you and are you of his Iudgment in all things I do not find it so comparing what you published as his Judgment in your Irenicum and what you have published in this Book as your own And Latimer that Zealous and Faithful Martyr as I remember at the end of his Sermons used to ex●ite the Hearers to Prayer and therein to remember such as were departed this Life Now must we therefore conclude there is not a Mote of Unlawfulness in praying for the Dead that otherwise such an holy Man as Latimer would not have been for it Most true it is considering the Times they lived in and the Temper of the Persons they had to deal with it was the great Work of God to carry on Reformation so far by them But I cannot say but their Hearts were to have carried it on further if the Times would have born it More Shame it is to others that have had fairer Opportunities since and yet have not minded the Work History of the Troubles at Franksford printed 1575 reprinted 164● p. 42. telleth of one that said Bishop Cranmer had drawn up a Book of Prayer an hundred times more perfect but the Clergy and Convocation with other Enemies would not let it pass And there followeth something further worth your noting pag. 43. that B●llinger told Whittingham Mr. H. and Mr. C. asked his Judgment concerning certain Points of that our Book as Surplice private Baptism Churching Women the Ring in Marriage with such like which as he said he allowed not and that he neither could if he would neitherwould if he might use the same in his Church whatsoever had been reported Therefore say I such a Man as Bullinger would not have been for imposing the same on others As to the Reformation in Queen Elizabeth's time it was not brought in nor brought on with a rigorous Imposition of those things in Controversie as Ball against Can Part 2. p. 13. In the first ten Years of Q. Elizabeth there was sweet consent among Brethren I think there was not a Man that thought of Separation The pressing of Subscription and Conformity in the tenth year of Q. Elizabeth ' s Raign was that which brough● in all the 〈◊〉 and Contentions following Iosias Nichol's Plea of the Innocent p. 210 217 printed 1602 thus Some five Years together before that unhappy time that Subscription was so generally offered which is now some 18 Years past there was such Unity between the Ministers and they joyned in all places so lovingly and diligently in Labour that not only did the unpreaching Minister and Non-resident quake and prepare themselves in measure to take pains in the Church but also many thousands were converted from Atheism and Popery c. But when Subscription came

the Orders of our Church are constantly neglected the Authority of the Bishops is slighted and contemned Tac●o caetera Now I had thought you might have granted more places for Worship not only desireable and useful but very necessary for such as cannot c●me to yours as far as the Apostle makes hearing of the Word necessary Rom. 10. 1● 17. more necessary than unnecessary Modes of Worship or such matters as you count but indifferent things But by what is here last cited it is too plain and manifest that you condemn all Religious Assemblies in England that follow not your Church-Rule and own not the Authority of the Bishops And thus it seems where you are zealous in words for Communion yet Subjection to the Bishops Authority is the thing you drive at And upon this Account though your Discourse was calcul●ted chiefly for the City of London yet it may ind●fferently serve for all other Places and Meetings in England where you● Church-Rules and Orders are not observed and obeyed As to our grief we in the Country have found many of the conformable Clergy with others improving your Authority and Arguments as far as they are able even against such Assemblies as meet off from the times of the Paro●hi●l Congregations meeting that they might not be censured to meet in opposition These are s●parate Meetings with you as well as others because the Orders of the Church are neglected in them But 3. What will you say of those Assemblies where Christ taught and the Disciples likewise whom he sent forth Did they d● this as und●r the Inspection and Government of the Rulers that then were Were they tyed up to the Church-Rules of the Jews in what they did were they not distinct and peculiar Officers Certainly you mince the matter when you say pag. 163. Our Saviour himself did only Teach his Disciples occasionally and at c●rtain Seasons As if he taught but rarely or seldom And as if he was c●ntent with his Disciples only to be his Hearers As you would have the silenced Ministers think it enough if they have three or four besides the Family whereas we read of Christ's teaching the Multitude and of the Multitude pressing upon him to hear And when he sent forth the Tw●lve M●t. 1● preaching was a good part of their Work And the Miracles they w●ought were to seal and confirm their Doctrine So the Seventy Luk. 10. were to t●●ch So much is implied ver 16. He that heareth you hearet● me and he that despiseth you despiseth me c. Now what will you make of them and their Hearers Here were distinct and peculiar Teachers not under the Government of the Iewish Church-Rulers Then were they new unlawful Churches I know you will not say i● But if you say h●re though they differed in somethings from the Form of the Iewish Church yet they did not separate Well grant that yet consider whether this Example may not justi●y those who ordinarily 〈◊〉 with their ●arochial Congregations in hearing Non-conformists at 〈◊〉 times And m●y it not justify those Non-conformist Ministers that 〈…〉 from the Parochial Congregations And how many more 〈…〉 but for the five Miles Act which 〈…〉 distinguish betwixt such and others that I can find but all are alike to you Yea so far are you from favouring these that sometimes you would have the Sin of those that own you for true Churches and have Communion with you as f●r as they can to be aggravated and more inexeusable in having other d●stinct which you account s●parat● Meetings Ball against Can part 1. p. 82. Neither did our Saviour nor his Disciples before his Death 〈◊〉 upon them to erect a new visible Church altogether distinct from the erring Synagogue but lived in th●t Church and frequented the Ordinanc●s neither as absolute Members of the Synagogue nor y●t as the visible Chur●h distinct from it But as visi●le Members of that primitive Church from which that Synagogue had degenerated I find you so hard and u●yielding in this Controvers● I should be glad if you would grant a little here which I wonder how you can so stifly deny in hopes of more in time 4. As you know our Reformers pleaded that in their departure from Rome they forsook not the Church but approached nearer to the Catholick an● Primitive ●hurch as P. Martyr Loc. Com. p. 915. So those Christian Assemblies you censure as new unlawful Churches because not under you● Rule suppose you have censured them rashly here if in their Worship they are nearer the Scripture-Rule And truly Sir you speak so home and fully to the purpose Rational Acc●unt p. 356 357. as is quite beyond the power and r●a●h of my poor Imagination to conceive how you can ever answer your self There you say Supposing any Church tho pretending to be never so Catholick doth restrain her Communion within such narrow and unjust Bounds ☞ Whatever Church takes upon her to limit and inclose the bounds of the Catholick becomes thereby divided from the Communion of the Catholick Church and all such who disown such an unjust inclosure do not so much divide from the Communion of that Church so in●losing ☞ as return to the Communion of the Primitive and Universal Church How will Dissenters thank you for this Methinks I have some hope that we shall in time be agreed th●t we shall have you who do so clearly understand and apprehend what Schism there is in any Churches limiting and inclosing the bounds of the Catholick Church shall we not have you again pleading for Catholick Terms And you say further ibid. p. 357. The disowning of those things wherein your Church is become Schismatical cannot certainly be any culpable Separation For whatever is so must be from a Church so far as it is Catholick but in our case it is from a Church so far only as it is not Catholick c. While such Passages so greatly befriending Dissenters that would gladly close with you upon Cath●●ick Term● drop from you at unawares wh●n you s●arce think of them wh●t an excellent 〈◊〉 ●●ould they have of you it indeed you was minded to undertake their Cause Yet how contrary hereunto are you in your too partial Account p. 305. where your Gentleman pinching you with this Question Can it be proved that Christ 〈…〉 the Guides of this Church with a power to make Laws and Decrees preseribing not only things necessary for common Order and Decency but new fed●ral Rites and teaching Signs and Symbols c. I answer say you that such a Church hath power to appoint Rules of Order and Decency not repugnant to the Word which whether this be to the purpose of new fed●r●l Rites and teaching Signs and Symbols will I suppose be further examined which on that account other are bound to submit to and to take such care of its 〈…〉 to admit none its Priviledges but such as do submit to them Here you are 〈◊〉 off from your Catholick Terms again and ●or

chuse oft to speak to you in others Words because I suppose if I spake the same things in my own Words they would not be so much regarded Reply p. 214. If they have any never so slight Errors and which appears so to me which yet they will force me to subscribe to and this you know is our case which M. de L' Angle seems to be ignorant of or else forgot himself and in these Lines I am upon went quite besides it if I communicate with them my Assent would be damnable or if they require the same subscription to some Truths which yet after my real endeavours in enquiry appear Errors to me I doubt not but my refus●l is ●o way damnable Something more you have immediately before This is home and answers M. de L' Angle's charging us with committing a very great Sin And where he cites Calvin and Beza p. 422. We may well be confident that they could not have submitted to such Terms as are put upon us And if he himself had submitted unto all that is required of us when he was here in England had he submitted to Re-ordination and owned Bishops a●a distinct order from Presbyters of Apostolical Institution I very much question whether it might not have drawn the displeasure of his Brethren upon him if not their Censure at his return as he speaks p. 421. Add p. 423. When I see what he says of the First Authors of the Separation I cannot but wish he had known them He condemns some Writings as unreasonable and passionate possibly he may mean our Answers to your Sermon but th●● fo● ought appearing in this Letter very probably he hath not seen them Yet ●fter all he comes to plead for Dissenters There is a very great number of good Men whose Faith is Pure and whose Piety is 〈◊〉 ●This ●estimony I hope is true and who remain separate from you only because their Simplicity is surprized c. And whether he should not have had the like Charity for very many Ministers as he hath for very many of their Hearers may be a question I rank these with those weak ones who said they were not of the Body and of whom 〈…〉 said they were of the Body for all that So why may not they who are of the same Faith and have the same Worship for substance be acknowledged as Brethren and still owned as in Communion with the Body tho they have not the same Ceremonies which are meer Shadows But he speaks more fully to the purpose p. 424. And I am sure I wish he could make us sure here That if there were nothing wanting to cure it but the abstaining from some Expressions the quitting some Ceremonies and the changing the Colour of some Habits you would resolve to do that and something more difficult than that with great Pleasure From hence as from that earnest Expression he hath in the Page foregoing In the name of God then do all that possibly you can On● would easily infer that he was little acquainted with the Case he understood not where we have stuck what hath thus long hindred our full Communion with the Church of England Otherwise for ought I can perceive here we might have had him pleading for us that such matters of difference might be quite removed or at least that they might not be urged and imposed And by what immediately followeth there p. 424. it appears he is a great Stranger to the Savoy-Conference never truly understood how Matters were carried or who have been the Obstructors of Union Had the Non-conformists then or at any time since refused to hearken and submit to fair and just Proposals which would not have pinched at all on that part which should be kept tender in every one Then had they been extreamly to blame and had stood very much in their own Light But God allows us not to break our Peace with him and our own Consciences for Peace with Men neither can true Piety Zeal and Charity three Cardinal Vertues which he commendeth in our Bishops and prayeth they may be increased more and more require so much of us which is not in our Power to grant and yield unto But seeing as he says afterwards he should be past all comfort if he should not see some new Attempt at least made for the success of a work so holy and of such Consequence in a time that seems so proper for it and Thousands more may say the like who truly prefer Ierusalem's Welfare before their chiefest Ioy I cannot but pray that those who are chiefly concerned may have all the Qualities of the Head and the Heart which are necessary to make them able and willing to contribute to this good Work Upon the Third Letter from Monsieur Claude ADD P. 439. Tho he says the distinction betwixt the Bishop and Priest is very Antient yet had he been required to own this Distinction as grounded on the Word of God and to assert the Right of Episcopacy as of Apostolical Institution I very much question whether this would not have gravelled him Add P. 440. I believe there are very few to be found amongst us that question the Ordination of all ordained by Bishops And many would be glad if it was permitted that some of you would sometimes help us in our Meetings Where he speaks of Christian Unity and Concord to my poor understanding Mr. Corbet speaks more soundly accurately and distinctly P. 441. He is expressly against Tyranny over the Soul and Mens forcing the Conscience by imposing a necessity to believe that which they believe and to practise that which they practise where we must suppose the things themselves are not necessary And according to what follows in this case The external Communion ceases of right and there is not any that is lawful to be had any more with such Was there not need of an Index Expurgatorius here This makes something for Dissenters and pinches some where else And what follows that We do not believe that a single difference of Government or Discipline nor even a difference of Ceremonies innocent in their own Nature is a sufficient occasion to break the sacred bond of Communion is little to your purpose I think a single difference of Ceremonies should not break Communion where there is an Vnion in the same Faith and in things necessary But there is more than a single difference of Ceremonies where no difference is allowed but the same Ceremonies are imposed on all tho one part cannot look on them as innocent Ceremonies P. 442. Speaking of the Protestant Churches in France he says We utterly disapprove and see with Grief certain Extreams whereinto some of the one side and the other do cast themselves The one looking upon Episcopacy as an order so absolutely necessary that without it there can be no Ecclesiastical Society c. Then according to them there may be true Churches true Ministers without Bishops And as they are ready to

whether are any bound to obey them at least when they over-rule Christ's own Institutions Way of Concord p. 111. § 15. And whether to devise new Species of Churches without God's Authority and impose them on the World in his Name and call all Dissenters Schismaticks be not a far worse Usurpation than to make and impose new Ceremonies or Liturgies ibid. § 16. Q. 74. Whether a Society of Neighbour-Christians associated with a Pastor or Pastors for personal Communion in holy Doctrine Discipline and Worship be not a Church Form of Divine Institution First Plea c. p. 8. And whether any Proof hath ever been produced that many Churches of this first Rank must of Duty make one fixed greater compound Church by Association as Diocesan National c. and that God hath instituted any such Form Whether the greatest Defenders of Prelacy do not affirm such to be but humane Institutions ib. p. 12 13. Whether ever any satisfactory Proof hath been brought that ever Christ or his Apostles did institute any particular Church taken in a political Sense as organized and not meerly for a Community without a Bishop or Pastor who had the Power of teaching them ruling them by the Word and Power of the Church-keys and leading them in publick Worship ibid. p. 13. And whether hath it yet been proved that any one Church of this first Rank which was not an Association of Churches consisted in Scripture-times of many much less of many scores or hundreds such fixed Churches or Congregations Or that any one Bishop of the first Rank that was not an Apostle or Bishop of Bishops had more than one of such fixed Societies or Churches under him or might have more stated Members of his Church than were capable of personal Communion and mutual Assistance at due Seasons in holy Doctrine Discipline and Worship As now there are many Chappels in some Parishes whose Proximity and Relation to the Parish-Churches make them capable of personal Communion in due seasons with the whole Parish at least per vices in those Churches and in their Conversation and as a single Congregation may prudently in Persecution or foul Weather meet oft-times in several Houses so why might not the great Church of Ierusalem which yet cannot be proved a quarter so big as some of our Parishes hold their publick Meetings oft at the same time in divers Houses when they had no Temples and yet be capable of personal Communion as before described ibid. p. 13 14. And when the learned Dr. Hammond on 1 Tim. 3. saith The Church of the Living God was every such regular Assembly of Christians under a Bishop such as Timothy was an Oeconomus set over them by Christ c. doth he not here suppose as he elsewhere sheweth that de facto Episcopal Churches were in Scripture-times but single Congregations Then whether is the new Form of Congregations jure divino when they become but parts of a Bishops Church And may we not query the same of the new Form of a Diocesan Church ibid. p. 5 6. And doth not Ignatius expresly make one Altar and one Bishop with Presbyters and Deacons to be the Note of a Churche's Unity and Individuation Whence learned Mr. Ioseph Mede doth argue it as certain that then a Bishop's Church was no other than such as usually communicated in one place ibid. p. 17. And see Answ. to Dr. Still Serm. p. 75. or 69. Q. 75. And seeing it cannot be proved that God hath instituted any other than Congregational or Parochial Churches as for present Communion whether must it not follow that none of the rest instituted by Man have Power to deprive such single Churches of any of the Priviledges granted them by Christ And whereas Christ hath made the Terms of Catholick Communion himself and hath commanded all such to worship him publickly in holy Communion under faithful Pastors chosen or at least consented to by themselves which was the Judgment of the Churches many hundred Years whether can any humane Order or Power deprive them of any of this Benefit or disoblige them from any of this Duty by just Authority Way of Concord p. 111. § 13. Q. 76. Then if any Prince would turn his Kingdom or a whole Province into one only Church and thereby overthrow all the first Order of Churches of Christ's Institution which are associated for personal present Communion allowing them no Pastors that have the Power of the Keys or all essential to their Office though he should allow Parochial Oratories or Chappels which should be no true Churches but parts of a Church Whether were it Schism to gather Churches within such a Church against the Laws of such a Prince First Plea c. p. 52. Or whether hath God made such proper Judges whether Christ should have Churches according to his Laws or whether God should be worshipped and Souls saved or his own Institution of Churches be observed Ibid. p. 53. Q. 77. And if any Persons shall pretend to have the Power of governing the Churches and Inferiour Pastors as their Bishops who are obtruded on those Churches without the Election or Consent of the People or inferiour Pastors and these Bishops shall by Laws or Mandates forbid such Assembling Preaching or Worship as otherwise would be Lawful and a Duty whether is it Schism to disobey such Laws or Mandates as such ibid. p. 80. Bishop Bilson of Subject p. 399. grants The Election of Bishops in those days belonged to the People and not to the Prince and though Valens by plain force placed Lucius there yet might the People lawfully reject him as no Bishop and cleave to Peter their right Pastor ibid. p. 79. And however in some Cases the Advantages of some imposed Persons may make it an Act of Prudence and so a Duty to consent yet whether are such truly the Bishops of such Churches till they do consent ibid. p. 80. Hath not this been taken for their Right given them by God And doth not Dr. Blondel de jure Plebis in Reg. Eccl. beyond Exception prove it with more ib. p. 81. Therefore if Bishops that have no Foundation of such Relative Power shall impose inferiour Pastors on the Parish-Churches and command the Peoples Acceptance and Obedience whether are the People bound to accept and obey them by any Authority that is in that Command as such Or whether is it Schism to disobey it ibid. p. 82. Q. 78. Whether doth it not follow from the Principles of the Diocesan that holdeth a Bishop is Essential to a Church and consequently that we have no more Churches than Diocesses That he who separateth from a Parish-Church separates from no Church Sacril Desert p. 24. Q 79. Whether we should not more justly deserve the term of Schismaticks if we renounced Communion with all other Churches except Parochial and Conformists And whose Conscience should sooner accuse him of Schism Whether ou●s that resolve to hold Communion seasonably with all true Christian Churches among us that