A scholasticall discourse demonstrating this conclusion, that ... neither the Pope, nor those called bishops in the church of Romes, are bishops either in order or jurisdiction ... / by R.C.
About this Item
Title
A scholasticall discourse demonstrating this conclusion, that ... neither the Pope, nor those called bishops in the church of Romes, are bishops either in order or jurisdiction ... / by R.C.
Author
R. C.
Publication
London :: Printed by J.G. for R. Royston,
1663.
Rights/Permissions
This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this text, in whole or in part. Please contact project staff at eebotcp-info@umich.edu for further further information or permissions.
Subject terms
Church of England -- Bishops.
Catholic Church -- Controversial literature.
Popes -- Temporal power.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A31175.0001.001
Cite this Item
"A scholasticall discourse demonstrating this conclusion, that ... neither the Pope, nor those called bishops in the church of Romes, are bishops either in order or jurisdiction ... / by R.C." In the digital collection Early English Books Online 2. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A31175.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 2, 2024.
Pages
CHAP. II. Asserting the Order of Bishops in the Church of England.
BUt though Erastus Senior, out of his chari∣ty to others, hath argued himself and party into a Heathenish state, and redu∣ced them into the same condition he intend∣ed us of the Church of England in his Preface; yet will not I grant the form used in the Church of England to be insufficient for the consecra∣ting of Bishops, of giving Episcopal Order: for since it is evident the Apostles did exercise this Order or Power, yet were endued with it by no other form then that used in our Church; how much better is it to apply this form, being instituted by our Saviour, to one
descriptionPage 8
presented to the Consecrators as a Bishop elect, and after examination and prayers as for a Bishop elect, and as called to the office of a Bishop, and after Consecration, to ex∣hort him as a Pastor or Bishop, then to alter it into any other, thereby making it doubtfull whether it be done or not? as if any Creature were wiser then God, and would dare to mend what God has made. But certainly it is most abominably done of Erastus Senior,* 1.1 equivocally and cantingly to deny this form of our Saviour, used in his Church as well as ours, to be any essential part of their form (which I believe no ingenuous man besides himself in his Church will doe:) and to af∣firm that the prayers of Propitiare, Domine, &c. anciently called the Benediction, and used ever since S. Peter's time in their Consecration, Physicè, non moralitèr loquendo, and no wayes es∣sential to the Consecration, but of later time altered by his Church, should give that which onely God could do; unless he will make himself or Church equal to God, to abrogate, or make what God has made a vain thing, and set up what himself and his party think fit above it, or instead of it. If there be any de∣fect
descriptionPage 9
in our Ordination, Erastus with much more ingenuity might have charged it upon our Saviour for instituting it, then upon our Church for imitating it.