Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
church_n act_n particular_a whole_a 3,052 5 5.3545 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A26909 The dangerous schismatick clearly detected and fully confuted for the saving of a distracted nation from that which would destroy Christian love and unity : occasioned by a resolver of three cases about church-communion / by Richard Baxter ... Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691. 1683 (1683) Wing B1237; ESTC R22896 59,069 62

There are 11 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Promise to Justifie all Believers justifieth each single Person when he believeth If the King should make one common Law to command all his Subjects that are Freeholders to live in Corporations or Hundreds described with their priviledges those priviledges would be all theirs that are so incorporated As one Charter may Priviledge every London Company diversified by subordinate Agreements 2. And that God who will have them thus incorporated and distributed into several single Churches doth Covenant or Promise according to their demerits to each Do I need to recite the peculiar Promises and threats to the seven Asian Churches Rev. 2. and 3. which are Covenants to them § 12. Next Pag. 10. He will tell us what Communion is and in many words it is to tell us that Communion is nothing but Vnion I know that quoad notationem nominis Communion may signifie Vnion with others But they that write Politicks have hitherto distinguished Vnion and Communion taking Communion for Actual Commnication or exercise of the duties of men in Union But to speak cross to other Writers on the same Subjects and give no reason for it and to confound Vnion and Communion is one part of this edifying Resolution § 13. Pag. 11. Our Communion with the Church consists in being members of the Church which we are made by Baptism saith he Then the Baptized are still in Communion with the Church till their baptism be nullified And hath he proved us Apostates § 14. Pag. 12. Should any man who is no member of the Church nor owns himself to be so intrude into the Church and Communicate in all Holy Offices it 's no Act of Communion c. A. I thought communicating ordinarily in Holy Offices had gone for an owning of Communion If it do not would you would tell us how to know who are of your Church § 15. p. 13. Saith he Church-Communion does not consist in particular Acts of Communion which can be performed among those who are present and Neighbours but in membership Now as a member is a member of the whole Body not meerly of any part of it c. All the Subjects of England who never saw nor converst with each other are members of the same Kingdom A. 1. That word meerly hath more Craft than Justice or Honesty Meerly signifieth Only I suppose and if he would make his Reader think that they that are for single Church peculiar membership and consent do take themselves to be meerly or only members of those single Churches and not of the Universal it is shameless injury 2. Will he ever draw men to conformity by making them believe that because they owe Common Communion to all Christians therefore we owe no special duty to the Bishops Priests Churches or Neighbours where we are setled Do the Men of one Colledge School Corporation owe no more duty to that than to all others Do the Free-holders of Belford-shire choose Knights for Middlesex or the Citizens of Oxford choose Officers in London These seem strange Resolutions to us 3. But doth he remember that if Communion consist not in Acts of Communion to such but in membership even with the distant then he that is baptized and no Apostate and performeth no other Acts of Communion to the Bishops Parson or People where he liveth than he is bound to perform to them a hundred or thousand miles off is not Separatist Methinks this favours Separation too much § 16. Pag. 14. When he denyed any Divine Covenant to make us members of particular Churches distinguish't from the Vniversal as all National Diocesan and Parochial are as parts from the whole he presently confteth all again saying The exercise of Church 〈◊〉 as to m●st of the particular duties and Offices of it must be confined to a particular Church and Congregation for we cannot actually joyn in the Communion of Prayers and Sacraments c. but with some particular Church A. Oportuit fuisse memorem 1. Reader doth not this man here confess that there are particular Churches 2. If these be not distinct from the whole then each particular is the whole 3. If the Exercise must be in particular Churches must not men Consent to their Relations and Duties Is it a sin to Promise Duty 4. Sure it is not meer Place but a mutual Relation of Pastors and People that distinguisheth these Churches The Presbyterians preach't once in the same Places that you do and yet you take them not for the same Church Pastors If one from York or Cornwall come into your Pulpit without consent do People stand as much related to him as to you Some men are of extraordinary sufficiency to resist and conquer the clearest evidence of Truth But he addes every Act of Communion thô performed to some particular Church is and must be an Act of Communion with the whole Catholick Church A. And who denyeth this No sober Independent or Presbyterian that ever I met with It 's a weighty Truth § 17. P. 14. Saith he Praying and Hearing and Receiving the Lords Supper together doth not make us more in Communion with the Church of England than with any other true and Orthodox part of the Church thô in the remotest part of the World A. I think that 's not true With the remotest parts you have only Catholick Communion with the Church Universal In England and London you have that and more even special subordinate Communion with your own King Bishop and Flock 2. And hath not the Church of England such Communion in obedience to its own Laws as the Act of Uniformity Convocation and Canons which you have not with all abroad Do your Bishops in Convocation make Canon Laws for all the World Do you Swear Canonical obedience as much to the Bishop of Paris or Ha●●nia c. as to your Ordinary Do the Canons of all Churches impose our Liturgy or ipso facto excommunicate all that affirm any thing in it or our Ceremonies or Church Government to be against Gods word Sure this is a peculiar kind of Communion 3. If not why are all the Nonconformists cast out that offer to officiate and Communicate on such terms as are common to all sound Churches Pag. 15. Saith he There is nothing in all these Acts of Communion which does more peculiarly unite us to such a particular Church than to the whole Christian Church A. What neither in these Acts nor any other Then we are no more bound to hear you or maintain you as our Pastor than to hear and maintain the whole Christian Church § 18. P. 20. Saith he There is no other Rule of Catholick Communion for Private Christians but to communicatee in all Religious Offices and all Acts of Government and Discipline with Christians those with whom they li●e A. 1. Elsewhere you added sound and Orthodox Else they that live with Arians Socinians Papists in Spain France Italy c. are bound to communicate with them in all Religious Offices and obey them 2. This
concludeth that where Presbytery or Independency is the way of the place where we live all must thus communicate and obey The King and Custom then may make any way to become our Duty 3. If you tell us that it 's only with the Sound and Orthodox you were as good say nothing unless you tell us who must judge that whether the People themselves or who for them 4. But if this be the only rule for private Christians what shall they do e. g. in Aethiopa Egypt Syria and many other Countreys where the Churches are such as General Councils and other Churches judge Hereticks or Schismaticks And what shall they do when at Antioch Alexandria Constantinople c. one party is uppermost by the Judgment of Councils and Prince one Year and another contrary party the next And what shall they do where the Prince equally tolerateth both and it 's hard to know which is the more numerous as in Zeno's and Anastasius Reign c. And what shall they do when many Chnrches in one City are of divers Tongues as well as Customs Have the Greeks French and Dutch in London no rule of Catholick Communion but communicating in all Office with the English and obeying all your Bishops Courts § 19. P. 21. Saith he Distinct and particular Churches which are in Communion with each other must have their distinct bounds and limits as every member has it's natural and proper place and Situation in the Body A. Why may not the Greeks Dutch and French live in Communion with the Churches London though they live dispersedly among them In Brandenburg Hassia and many free Cities and Belgia where Lutherans and Calvinists as called live together and own each other as Brethren why may not both be Churches of Christ § 20. P. 21 22. A great deal more he hath of the like making Schismaticks at his Pleasure This is plain in the Case of the Presbyterian and Independent Churches and those other Conventicles They are Churches in a Church Nothing can justifie the Distinction of Christians into several Churches but only such a distance of place as makes it necessary c. p. 22. Distinct Churches in the same place can never be under the same Communion A. These things are repeated so oft and the word separate so deceitfully rolled over and over that I will answer all together under his third Case at the End § 21. P. 27. See how openly he recanteth most aforesaid There is a sence indeed wherein we may be said to be members of one particular Church considered as distinct from all other particular Churches But that principally consists in Government and Discipline Every Christian is a member of the Whole Christian Church and in Communion with it but he is under the immediate instruction and Government of his own Bishop and Presbyters and is bound to personal Communion with them and this constitutes a particular Church in which all Acts of Worship and all Acts of Discipline and Government are under the Direction and conduct of a particular Bishop A. Omitting that he seemeth to make the Parochial Churches no Churches but parts of one here he saith all that he seemed to write against and that those that he reproacheth hold allowing the difference of the extent of Churches And is it Edifying to read such a discourse that saith and unsaith by self-contradiction And he adjoyns 28. p. how by agreement Patriarchal and National Churches are made And is not Agreement a humane Contract CHAP. II. Of his first Case § 1. PAge 31. His first Case Whether Communion with some Church or other be a necessary Duty incumbent on Christians And he thinks the Resolution of this is as plain as whether it be necessary for every man to be a Christian For every Christian is baptized into the Communion of the Church A. In this I know no Christian adversary to him But it being the Vniversal Church that he giveth his proof of necessary Communion with it 's odde to say We must have Communion with some Church or other As if there were more than one Universal Church 2. But we grant more that all that can well should be also members of some single Church § 2. P. 32. He saith External and Actual Communion is an Essential duty of a Church-member meaning a Christian. A. 1. And yet before he denyed that Communion lay essentially in this Exercise but only in Vnion Yea and Nay is his Custom 2. Some few Christians as those that live where such Communion cannot be had without sin c. are not bound to it therefore it is not true that it is Essential to Universal Church-membership And I think sickness endeth not the essentials that disableth men 3. Note Reader that by this mans Doctrine we are all unchristened and damned if we do not gather into disallowed Churches if we be unjustly cast out of the allowed ones For all must be Church members that will be Christians and an unjust Excommunication cannot disoblige us from Christianity nor bind us to consent to be damned Now read the 5th 6th 7th 8th c. Canons of the Church of England which ipso facto Excommunicate all that affirm any thing in their Liturgy Articles Ceremonies or Government sinful and answer Spalatensis arguments against Excommunicating ipso facto and prove all this just and you may prove what you will just But you see where he layeth the Controversie If any be Excommunicated without sufficient cause or by Lay Civilians to whom God never gave that power or by such Bishops or Pastors as have no just Authority for want of a true call or Consent or if any unlawful thing be made necessary to Communion all such persons must by his own confessions hold Church-communion whether these imposers will or not for all Christians are bound to be of some Church § 3. p. 33 34. He saith that None but publick Prayers are the Prayers of the Church properly and acts of Communion that is such as are offered by the hands of men authorized and set apart for that purpose c. Ans. Who would have thought that we are more for the Liturgy than he I undertake to prove that all the Responsal Prayers and all the Litany Prayers in which the Minister names but the matter to them and the People make it a Prayer by speaking the petitioning parts are all the publick Prayers of the Church and so are all the petitioning Psalms spoke or sung by the People and not only that which is offered by the Priest I do not think that he believeth what he carelesly saith here himself But the Independents are stiffer for his first Thesis of the necessity of Church-communion than he is his unfit words I pass by CHAP. III. Of his second Case § 1. THE next question of Occasional Communion as distinct from fixed he turns out of doors as if there could be no such thing and it 's very true as to the Church universal but as to visible actual
and Schismaticks A. I had hoped that no man but Mr. Cheny had talkt at this rate I. It 's agreed on that there is but one Universal Church The contrary is a Contradiction 2. It is agreed that there is no lawful particular Church which is not a part of the Universal 3. That whoever hath just Union and Communion with a true particular Church hath Union and Communion with the Universal 4. That all men in their Worship of God should accordingly perform it and do all that they do as Men in that Relation to the Universal Church None of this is controverted II. But I had hoped never to have heard any but Seekers say that there are not many lawful particular Churches distinct from the whole and from one another though not disjunct in the Common Essentials For the proof of the contrary 1. I begin with that which I expect should be most powerful The mans own after-Confessions to which he is oft brought Pag. 8. Distance of Place and the necessities and conveniences of Worship and Discipline has divided the Church into several parts and members and Particular Churches c. So pag. 14. pag. 19. All Christian Churches ought to be members of one More fully p. 20 21. This is ad hominem Yea and Nay is his Resolution 2. But I 'le bring other Arguments that prevail more with me The Sacred Scriptures oft tell us of many Churches therefore there are many Act. 9. 31. The Churches had rest and 15. 4. Confirming the Churches 16. 5. So were the Churches established in the Faith Rom. 16. 4. All the Churches of the Gentiles So ver 16. 1 Cor. 7. 17. So ordain I in all Churches 11. 16. Neither the Churches of God have such Custom 14. 33. As in all the Churches of the Saints 34. Let your Women keep silence in the Churches So 16. 1. 19. 2 Cor. 8. 1. The Grace of God bestowed on the Churches of Macedonia 18. Whose Praise is in the Gospel through all the Churches So 19. 23 24. and 11. 8. 28. The care of all the Churches 12. 13. Inferior to the other Churches Gal. 1. 2 22. 1 Thes. 2. 14. 2 Thes. 1. 4. Rev. 1. 4. To the seven Churches ver 11. 20. Angels and Candlesticks of the seven Churches And 2. 7 11 17 29. and 3. 6 13 22 23. and 22. 16. His Concordance might have shew'd him all these in order Phil. 4. 15. No Church communicated with me concerning giving and receiving but ye only The dispute now must be whether the Apostles or this Resolver be to be believed They say there are many Churches parts of One he saith There is but one and it 's Schismatical to divide it into distinct memberships or Bodyes c. It 's no Schisme here to say I am for Paul and the Holy Scripture Let who will believe the contradictor 3. My next Argument is this Where there are many Political Societies consisting of Christian Pastors and People professedly associated for the ordinary Exercise of those Relations as such in holy Communion in Christian Doctrine Worship Order and Conversation for Edification in true Faith Hope Love and Obedience and the Glorifying of God therein There are many distinct true Churches parts of the Church Universal But on Earth there are many such Societyes c. Ergo c. Either the controversie is De re or de nomine for we called Separatists use to separate these 1. If de re Let the existence of the thing defined be tryed by Scripture Reason and common Experience 2. If de nomine Forma quae dat esse dat Nomen Here is the true specifick form which is found in many single Churches ergo the Name of such single or individual Churches is due to them 4. Again ad hominem from the consequences 1. If there be not many single Churches in the Universal then there are not many Patriarchal National Provincial Metropolitical Diocesan or Parochial Churches For non entium non datur numerus Many nothings is a contradiction Multae sunt ergo sunt Ab est tertij adjecti ad est secundi valet argumentum But if there be not many then 1. All the Parish Churches in England being but one and not many a Patron can have right to present to no one as a Church more than to another 2. Then the Parson Vicar or Curate is no more the Parson of one Church than of another nor bound to no more Care and Duty for there is but one 3. Then no one is bound to go to one Parish Church more than another for there is but one 4. Then the Temple and Tithes belong no more to one than another 5. Then no Bishop is the proper Bishop of one Diocesan Church more than of another 6. Then all the revenues of the Bishop of London are no more appropriate to one Church than to another 7. Then you owe no more Obedience to the Bishops of one Diocesan Church than another 8. Then you make the King no more Head or Governour of the Church of England than of another 9. Then a Diocesan oweth no Reverence to a Metropolitane Church if there be none such 10. Then many Churches cannot have Communion nor send Bishops to Councils if there be not many 11. And the charge of Separation from a Church that is no Church is a contradiction 5. I adde from Parity of Reaon if many distinct subordinate Societies may make one Civil Body Politick so they may one Universal Church But the Antecedent is undoubted If it be Learnedly said with Mr. Cheny that one whole cannot be Part of another whole One may attain the perfection by that time he hath worn the Breeches but a few years to know that a whole Family may be part of a whole Village and a whole Vicinage be part of a whole City and a whole Colledge be part of a whole University and a whole City part of a whole Kingdom and a whole Kingdom part of the whole Earth And if it be objected that the Names of the whole and parts are here divers but a Church and a Church are the same Name I Answer at the same age one may learn that the same Name proveth not the sameness of the things Named and that ex penuria nominum the Genus and Species the Totum and Parts have oft equivocally the same Name with the Addition of just Notes of distinction Sometimes an Academy of many Schools is called Schola and so are the single Schools therein The City of London is a Society and so are the Societies of Merchant-Taylors Drapers Mercers c. therein § 4. But these Churches must be members of one another or they are Schismaticks A. 1. How can that be if they be all but one 2. This is also above or below the ferula age They are no members of one another but all members of the whole Yet how oft have we this with the sting of Schisme as Damning as Murder or Adultery in
the Tail of it The hand is not a member or part of the Foot or the Foot of the Hand or the Liver a member of the Lungs c. but each one of the Man If ever I were a Schoolmaster again I would perswade my Boyes that A is not a member of B nor B of C c. but each of the Alphabet And that one leaf of their Book is not a member of another but both of the Book And if they were ripe for the University I would perswade them that Exter Colledge is not a member of Corpus Christi nor that of Lincoln c. but all of the Universitie of Oxford And I think that Bristol is not a member of Exeter or Gloucester c. but all of England and that the Company of Stationers are not part of the Society of Merchants or Drapers c. but all of London What a Priviledg is it that a Man may believe this about any such thing without Schisme and Damnation And how dreadful to fall into such Church-mens hands that in their Case make it Schisme Separation and Damnation But there is a Remedy § 5. But he hath reason for what he saith p. 3 4. Indeed it is extreamly absurd and unreasonable to say that the Christian Church which is built on the same Foundation c. who enjoy all Priviledges in Common should be divided into 〈◊〉 distinct and separate Bodies thô of the sa●e kind and nature as Peter James and Iohn are distinct Persons It 's absurd to say That where every thing is common there is not one Community Ans. Let us not swallow this without Chewing 1. Whether all be extreamly absurd and unreasonable which such Doctors call so I am grown to doubt as much as whether all be Schism which Schismaticks call so Ipse dixit is no Proof 2. What the meaning of this great Decantate Word Separate is must anon be enquired But may not Churches be distinct and not culpably separate He confesseth afterwards both local distinction and separation 3. How far are the Vniversal Church and Particular Churches distinct As Whole and Parts Must the World at last learn that Whole and Parts are not distinct If you take if for absurd to distinguish a Man from a Body or from a Liver Hand or Foot Dissenters do not nor to distinguish a Colledge from an University a House from a Street a Street from a City c. But how are the Particular Churches distinguished one from another Reader so constantly do such men fight with themselves that it 's meet to ask whether they that thus say there are not many distinct Churches do not assert a far wider difference between many than those they dissent from We affirm that there are many and that they differ not in specie but numero as Colledges Cities do among themselves but these men after all this hold not only a numerical but a specifick difference even as Parochial Diocesan Provincial Patriarchal National at least Presbyters and Diocesans differing Ordine vel Specie with them the Church denominated from them must do so too § 6. But he confirms it Peter James and John thô they partake of the same common nature yet each of them have a distinct Essence and Subsistence of their own and this makes them distinct Persons but whether the very Nature and Essence of a Body or Society consists in having all things common there can be but one Body Ans. I hope it s no culpable Separation to distinguish things as differing specie numero and this is the Doctors meaning if his words are significant and the common way of expressing it would have been Peter and John differ numerically but not in specie but two Churches differ neither specie nor numero And 1. Reader whereas he said before that the Church is not divided into distinct Bodies as James and John c. did you think till you that James and John and the Doctor and the several Bishops had not been distinct parts of the Church in their distinct natural bodies 2. And why may there not be distinct Politick Bodies or Compound in one whole as well as natural certainly all things corporeal save Attomes are Compounds A Muscle a Hand a Foot parts similar and dissimilar in man are all compounded of lesser Parts If many Students may make one Colledge why may not many Colledges make one University It 's strange if a Doctor deny this 3. But let us consider of his Reason and enquire 1. Whether the Church have all things Common 2. Whether the very Essence of it consist in this I. It is granted that the whole Essence of the Genus and Species is found in every individual of that Species Natural or Politick but did we ever hear till Mr. Cheny and this Doctor said it that Politick Bodies differ not numero as well as Natural The Kingdom of England and of France are two the Church of Rome and Constantinople long strove which should be uppermost but who ever said that they were not two II. Have they all things common Dissenters would have excepted Wives and Husbands thô the Canons called Apostolical do not Why should the Essence of a Church lie in this and not the Essence of a City or Kingdom Tories in Ireland would have all common Merchants and Tradesmen Knights Lords and Princes here would not But it 's no Schism here also to distinguish simpliciter secundum quid Propriety and the use of Propriety There is no Community without Propriety Men have first a Propriety in themselves their members their food the acquests of their Labours their Wives and Children and Goods And they consent to Community to preserve this Propriety because every man loveth himself And yet they must use their Propriety even of Life for common good because all are better than one But if they had no Propriety they could not so use it for the Common-wealth And I never conformed to the Doctrine that denyeth Propriety in Church Members and Particular Churches and thought all simply common I 'le tell you what Particular Churches have to individuate them not common to all 1. They consist of individual natural Persons many of which as much differ from many other Persons those in England from those in Spain as one man doth from another 2. Their Graces and gifts are numerically distinct Faith Hope Love c. from those of other Churches thô ejusdem speciei 3. England and France London and Oxford have Churches of different place and Scit●●ti●● 4. But the formal individuating difference is their nearest Relation to their several Pastors as several Kingdoms Cities Schools are n●merically distinct by their distinct Kings Maiors School-masters so are several Churches ●jusdem speci●i 1. Thess. 5. 12 13. Know those that are among you and over you in the Lord and esteem them highly in love for their Works sake As every mans Wife Children and Servants must be used for the common good and yet are
some above the rest And if the Magistrate affix Baronies Honours Revenues or his own due Civil forcing Power and make the same Men Magistrates and Ministers whether we think it prudent and well done or not we must honour and obey them XVIII Some call these humane Accidental Orders forms of Church Government and affirm as Bishop Reignolds did and Dr. Stillingfleet in his Irenicon and many excellent men by him cited that no form of Church Government is of Divine Command Which is true of all this second sort of Government which is but Accidental aud humane but not at all of the first sort which is Divine and Essential to Christ himself first and to Pastors as such by his appointment so that the essential Government of the Universal Church by Christ and of each particular Church by Pastors specified by him if not of Supervisors of many as succeeding Apostles and Evangelists in their Ordinary work are of unalterable Divine right But the humane forms are alterable Such I account 1. The Presidency and Moderatorship and accidental Government of one Bishop in a single Church over the other Presbyters Deacons c. 2. The accidental Government of a Diocesan as an Archbishop over these lowest Bishops and Churches 3. And the Superiority of Metropolitans and Patriarchs over them so it be but in such Accidentals and within the same Empire not imposing a forreign Jurisdiction These tota specie differ from the Divine Offices XIX All these single Church being parts of the Universal are less noble than the whole and are to do all that they do as members in Union with the Whole and to do all as Acts of Communion with them XX. The General precepts of doing all to Edification Concord Peace Order c. oblige all the Churches to hold such correspondencies as are needful to these Ends And Synods are one special means which should be used as far and oft as the Ends require And if National Metropolitans and Patriarchs order such Synods I am not one that will disobey them But if on these pretences any would make Synods more necessary than they are and use them as Governours by Legislation and Judgement over the Particular Bishops by the use of the Church Keyes and will affixe to them or Metropolitans besides an Agreeing Power and the said Government in Accidentals a proper Church Government by making and unmaking Ministers or Christians excommunicating and absolving as Rulers by the said Keyes it may be a duty to disown such usurpations As the King would disown an Assembly of Princes any where met that would claim a Proper Government of him and his Kingdom Thô it were much to be wisht that all Christian Princes would hold such Assemblies for the Concord and Peace of Christendom XXI The Essentials of Faith Hope and Loving 〈◊〉 essentiate the Church objectively And these are all summarily contained in the Baptismal Covenant explained in the Creed Lords Prayer and Decalouge and all with much more even Integrals and needful Accidentals in the Sacred Scriptures which taking in the Law of Nature are Gods Universal Law XXII There is no Church on Earth so sound and Orthodox as to want no Integral part of Christian Religion Proved There is no man on Earth much less any multitude so sound as to want no Integral part But all Churches consist only of Men And therefore if all the Men be so far defective all the Churches are so It is not their Objective Religion Generally and implicitely received that I mean but their Subjective Religion and their explicite reception of the Objective The Scripture is our perfect Objective Religion in it self and as an Object proposed and in general and implicitely we all receive it But as a man may say I believe all that 's in the Scripture and yet be ignorant of the very Essentials in it so a man may explicitely know and believe all the Essentials and more and yet be ignorant of many Integrals All things in Scripture proposed to our Faith Hope and Practice are the Integrals of our Religion But no Christian understandeth all these proposals or words of Scripture Therefore no Christian explicitely believeth them all or practiceth all To hold the contrary is to hold that some Church is perfect in Understanding Faith Hope and Practice without Ignorance Errour or Sin that is not to know what a man or a Christian on Earth is XXIII Much less do all Churches agree in unnecessary indifferent accidents nor ever did nor ever will or can do XXIV The measuring out Churches by limits of Ground Parochial or Diocesan is a meer humane ordering of a mutable accident and no Divine Determination And if all were taken for Church members-because they dwell in those precincts it were wicked But if it be but all in those precincts that are qualified Consenters it is usually a convenient measure But such as in many Cases must be broken XXV If a Church with Faithful Pastors be well setled in a place first where there are not more than should make up that one Church it is not meet for any there to gather a distinct Church thô of the same Faith without such weighty reason as will prove it necessary or like to do more good than hurt 1. Because Love inclineth to the greatest Union 2. Because a Great Church is more strong and honourable than a small if the number be not so great as to hinder the Ends. 3. And the Ancient Churches kept this Union XXVI If Magistrates make such Laws about Church Accidents as tend to further the Churches wellfare or are so pretended and not against it we must obey them But if they will either invade Christs Authority or cross it by making Laws against his or such as are proper to his Prerogative to make or invade the Pastors Office and the Churches properright given by Christ or determine Accidents to the Destruction of the Substance the Church Doctrine Worship or Ends these bind the Consciences of none to Obedience but Christ must be obeyed and we must patiently suffer XXVII Self-interest Self-Government and Family-Government are all antecedent to Publick Government which Ruleth them for the Common good but hath no Authority to destroy them No King or Prelate can bind a man to do that which would damn his Soul nor to omit that which is needful to his Salvation All power is for Edification They are Gods Ministers for Good XXVIII As it belongs to self-government to choose our own Dyet and Cloaths and Wives and Physicians thô we may be restrained from doing publick hurt on such pretences And it belongs to Family Government to educate our own Children and choose their Tutors Callings Wives c. so it more nearly belongs to self-government to choose the most safe and profitable means of our own Salvation which no man may forbid us and to avoid that which is pernicious or hurtful and to Family-Government to do the like for our Children XXIX It is false Doctrine
THE DANGEROUS SCHISMATICK CLEARLY DETECTED and fully CONFUTED For the Saving of a Distracted Nation from that which would destroy Christian Love and Unity Occasioned by a Resolver of Three CASES about CHURCH-COMMUNION By RICHARD BAXTER a Catholique Christian who is against confining Christian Love and Communion to any Sect how Great soever Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved John 13. 35. By this shall all men know you are my Disciples if ye have Love one to another 1 John 4. 16. He that dwelleth in Love dwelleth in God and he in him Rom. 14. 1. 17 18. Him that is weak in the Faith receive ye but not to doubtful Disputations for the Kingdom of God is not Meat and Drink but Righteousness and Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost for he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God and approved of Men. LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns at the lower end of Cheapside near Mercers-Chappel 1683. The English Schismatick detected and confuted Occasioned by a Resolver of Cases about Church Communion CHAP. I. SAITH THE RESOLVER § 1. THE Church is a Body or society of men separated from the rest of the World and united to God and to themselves by a Divine Covenant A. He saith this is the plainest description he can give That is not the fault of his Auditors or Readers 1. As to the Genus a Community of equals without Rulers is a body but I suppose he meaneth not such 2. Is it enough that it be of Men sure now they should be Christians 3. Many are separated from the rest of the World secundum quid that are no Christians some in one respect and some in another and none in all respects 4. Vnited to God is an ambiguous word no Creature is Vnited to him perfectly so as to be thereby what he is God in the created Nature Only Christ is united to him Hypostatically in his created Nature All are so far united to him in natural being as that in him they live and move and have their being And the Nature of man is one sort of his Image All things are united to him as effects to their constant efficient The Church should not be defined without any mention of Christ The Churches Union with God is by Christ. 5. Christ himself as Head is an essential part of the Church and should not be left out of a Definition thô the meer Body may in common speech be called the Church as the People may be called a Kingdom 6. Will any Divine Covenant serve or must it not be only the Baptismal Covenant 7. Is it called Divine only as made by God or as commanded by God and made by Man or as mutual Certainly Gods Law and offered or Conditional Promise is most frequently called His Covenant in Scripture and this uniteth not men to God till they consent and Covenant with him Their own Covenant Act is necessary hereto And that is a Divine Covenant only as commanded and accepted and done by Gods assisting Grace 8. The form of a Church is Relative and the Terminus is essential to a Relation It is no definition that hath not the End of the Association Therefore this is none at all and so the beginning tells us what to expect This description hath nothing in it but what may agree to divers forms of Society and so hath not the form of a Church And if he intended not a Definition but a loose description I would a defining Doctor had had the Chair during this controversie Let us try this description upon a Mahometan Kingdom Army or Navy or suppose them meer Deists 1. Such a Kingdom Army or Navy may be a Society 2. Of Men. 3. Separated from the rest of the World secundum quid ad hoc and none are separated from it simpliciter ad omnia e. g. No man is separated from the common humanity No Deist from any but Atheists and no Christian in believing a God and the Law of Nature and Nations 4. They are Vnited to God so far as owning a God and Worshipping him amounts to besides the Union of the Creature with the Creator in whom he liveth c. And no unregenerate ungodly Christian is united to him savingly 5. They are united among themselves 6. This is by a Covenant 7. And by a Covenant Divine as to command approbation and object It is God that they Covenant to own and obey The common Profession of the Mahometans is There is one God and Mahomet is his Prophet It is Divine in tantum as commanded For God Commandeth all men to Own him to believe that Godis and that he is the Rewarder of them that diligently seek him And God so far approveth it St. James saith Thou dost well to him that believeth there is a God much more that is professedly devoted to him Let us by this examine the Jewish Church Jews now may be 1. A Body 2. Of Men 3. Separated from the rest of the World even in Religion and Church pretensions 4. United to God as Creatures as Men as the corporal seed of Abraham and as professing Belief Love and Obedience to God as their God 5. Strictly united among themselves 6. By a Covenant 7. Which God once commanded and still approveth so far as they own God Let us consider whether this description take not in those in every Nation that fear God and work Righteousness that never heard of Christ being thus combined And whether the Kingdom of God be not larger than his Church Joyn the Head and Tail of this mans book together and by the Head the description for ought I see Jews mahometans if not almost all Heathens are the Church But at the End I think none on Earth is the Church At least none that separate from a pair of Organs or an ignorant Curate Nor can any man know who Page 2. § 2. He explaineth his Word Body as opposed to a confused Multitude A. But a Community of Equals that have no Governours may have order and 〈◊〉 s no confused Multitude And he himself after pleads over much for a●ecessi●●v of Rulers P. 3. § 3. And in many places his Confusion and grand errour is repeated that the Christian Church is but one p. 7. We know no Church but what all Christians are members of by Baptisme which is the Vniversal Church p. 8. There is but one Church of which all Christians are members as there is but one Covenant p. 19. If there be but one Church and one Communion of which all true Christians are members c. p. 23. I am no otherwise a member of any particular Church than I am of the Vniversal p. 40. It 's a schismatical Notion of membership that divides the Christian Church into distinct memberships and therefore into the distinct Bodyes And p. 19. and often he saith those Churches which are not members of each other are separate Churches
and humane is one part of that which is mutual 1. As to the Vniversal Church 1. God as Legislator and Donor instituteth the species of Covenanting by Baptism and therein he commandeth mans consent to his offered Covenant and conditionally promiseth to be our God But Conditionale nihil ponit in esse This much maketh no Christian nor Church To command a man to be a Christian and conditionally to promise him life if he will be one proveth him not to be one else all were Christians that reject an offered Christ. 2. But when man consenteth and covenanteth with God then Gods conditional gift becomes actual and efficacious the man being a capable Recipient and not before and in this it is the Contract that is the Fundamentum Relationis but a single Promise is not a mutual Covenant or Contract So that it is no wiser Divinity to say Gods Covenant and not mans consent Covenant or Contract with God doth make Christians and the universal Church than it is sober Reason to say That Gods Institution of Marriage or Magistracie only doth make the Relation of Husband and Wife without their covenanting consent or doth make Common-wealths without the consent or Covenant of Sovereign and Subjects Did this Doctor think that Voluntariness is not as necessary to the Relation of Christianity as to the Relation of Prince and Subjects yea or of Husband and Wife if he do he is shamefully mistaken Baptism delivereth men possession of Pardon Grace and right to Glory and can men have this against their wills One would think by the Doctrine and course of some men that they could force men to Pardon and Salvation if I believed that their force could accomplish this I would never call it Persecution If they can force men to be true Christians they may force them to be justifyed and saved and then they are very uncharitable if they do not Let them then cease preaching and disputing us to their Opinion but bring us all to Heaven whether we will or not Yea the self-contradictor playing fast and loose confesseth p. 6. That no man at age can be admitted to Baptism till he profess his faith in Christ and voluntarily undertake the Baptismal Vow And is not that humane Covenanting Yea he knoweth that the Liturgie maketh even Neighbours or Strangers vow and covenant both in the name of the Child and for the Child And so necessary doth the Episcopal Church think humane Covenanting that without this no Child must be Baptized publickly though the Parents would covenant and that they can neither for Love nor Money for many poor men hire Godfathers get any one much less three who examined will seriously purpose to perform the Covenant for the Child 's holy Education which they make II. But is not humane Covenanting a cause of single Church Relation as well as of universal I see no cause to doubt it and I am sure that the Church for a thousand years before and since Popery came in have declared him no Bishop that comes in without consent of Clergie and People which Consent is their covenanting act To make a single Church manifold consent goeth to the Fundamentum Relationis 1. God commandeth single Church Officers order and consent and promiseth them his blessing where they are met The Lord and his Angels are among them No command is vain and without a virtual Promise 2. To this a threefold humane consent is needful Ordinarily 1. the Persons called 2. The Ordainers when it may be had 3. The Peoples He that formerly from the Apostles dayes for a thousand years should have said that neither the covenanting that is the consent of the Pastor or People or Ordainers is necessary to the Fundamentum of a single Church Relation or Form would have been taken for a wild-brain'd Schismatick at least § 8. But saith this Doctor and another of them p. 6. But the Independent Church Covenant between Pastor and people is of a very different nature from this Vnless any man will say that the voluntary Contract and Covenant which the Independents exact from their Members and wherein they place a Church state be part of the Baptismal vow if it be not then they found the Church upon a humane Covenant for Christ hath made but one Covenant with Mankind which is contained in the Vow of Baptism if it be then no man is a Christian but an Independent Ans. Alas for the Church that is taught at this rate 1. I never saw what Independents do in this case but I think none of them that are Sober own any other sort of Church but the universal and single Churches as members of it and therefore require no Contract but 1. To the Covenant of Baptism or Christianity 2. To the Duties of their particular Church-relation 2. And nothing is here of necessity but manifested Consent which is a real Contract but a clearer or a darker an explicite or implicite consent differ only ad melius esse 3. Is not God the Author of Magistracy Marriage c. And is it any violation of Gods part if Rulers and People Husband and Wife be Covenanters by his command 4. Is it any renuntiation of Baptism to promise at Ordination to obey the Arch-Bishop and Bishop and to take the Oath of Canonical Obedience Is it not still exacted Are not the Takers of it obliged are not Covenants imposed on all that will be Ministers in the act of Uniformity are not multitudes kept out and cast out for not making these Covenants Quo reneam nodo c. How should one deal with such slippery men Good Mr. Zachary Cawdry that wrote to have all men to covenant Submission to Bishops and Parish Ministers did not dream that it was any violation of Baptism 5. Do not men owe duty to their Pastors which they owe to no others If not put them not on it Why are you angry with them for going from you Why doth the Canon suspend those that receive them to Communion from another Parish that hath no Preacher Why are we ruined for not covenanting as aforesaid if yea then is it against Baptism to promise to do our duty 6. But hath God commanded or instituted no Covenant but Baptism Yes sure the Matrimonial at least and I think Ordination is covenanting for the Ministry Did not the Apostle Acts 14. 23. ordain Elders in every Church if you would have by Suffrage left out of the Translation no sober man can doubt but it was by the Peoples consent and was it without their consent that Titus was to ordain Elders in every City Could any then come otherwise in Did not all Churches hold and practise this after and was it none of Gods Institution If so God requireth us not to take any of you for our Bishops or Pastors Who then requireth it What meaneth Paul when he saith they gave up themselves to the Lord and to us by the Will of God 7. Can the wit of man imagine how
it is possible without consent for a man to be made the Pastor of any Flock Who ever ordained a man against his will or for any man to have Title against his will to the proper oversight and pastoral care of any one Pastor or the priviledges of any Church If any think they may be cramm'd and drencht with the Sacrament or that an unwilling man may have a sealed pardon and gift of Salvation delivered him he will make a new Gospel And how any particular Pastor is bound to give that man the Sacrament ordinarily that consents not ordinarily to receive it of him I know not No man is a member of any City or any Company of Free-men in the City but by mutual consent and the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy to the King maketh not the Oath of a Citizen as such or of a Member of a Company as such unlawful 8. Doth this Doctor think that he ever yet proved to sober men that the Covenant aforesaid of Godfathers and Godmothers to make Christians and members of the universal Church is more or so much of Gods Institution than the Contract or Consent between Bishops or Pastors and People to make a single Political Church 9. If it follow not that no man is the Kings Subject that sweareth not to the City It will not follow that none is a Christian but an Independent or Church-consenter 10. How are your Parish or Diocesan Church members known to your selves or any others Are all that dwell in the Parish or Diocess your Church members Then Atheists Sadducees Hobbists and all vicious men and thousands that never communicate are such Yea those that you call Separatists If it be every transient Communicant have you a proper Pastoral care of every Travellers Soul that so communicates with you You after plead that his very ordinary Communion maketh him not a member if he be unwilling to be one And is not his consent then necessary Or if ordinary Communion be the test how few then of great Parishes are of the Church yet that is because such Communion signifieth their Consent to your over-sight of them § 9. But it 's much to be approved which p. 5. and oft he saith that to be taken into Covenant with God and to be received into the Church is the very same thing as to the Universal Church By which all his gross Schismatical Accusations afterwards are confuted No man then is out of the Church that is not out of the Baptismal Covenant either by not taking it or by renouncing some Essential part of it And when will he prove that to take him rather than Dr. Bates that was cast out to be a Teacher or Pastor at Dunstans or to take this man and not another to be the Lawful Bishop or Priest and to obey him in every Oath and Ceremony is an Essential part of the Baptismal Covenant or of Christianity But such a rope of Sand as Mr. Dodwell and this man tye together to bind men to their Sect will serve turn with some that know not who speaks Truth by any surer way than prejudice § 10. His Doctrine of Separation and gathering Churches out of Churches is anon to be considered But whereas he addes p. 7. These men convert Christians from common Christianity and the Communion of the Vniversal Church to Independency Ans. My acquaintance with them is small save by reading their Books And there are few Men of any Common Denomination Episcopal or other that are not in many things disagreed But I must in Charity to them say that as far as I can judge by their Writings or Speech he palpably slandereth them and that none that are grave and sober among them do separate their Churches from the common Christianity or the Universal Church any more than the Company of Stationers Ironmongers c. are separated from the City of London or London from England or Trinity Colledge from the University of Cambridge or Oxford I never met with man and I am confident never shall do that doth not take his Independent Church to be part of the Universal and Dependent as a part on the whole If belying others stopt at words the wrong were small But when it 's made but the stairs to hatred and destroying it 's his way to cure Schism that is commonly painted with Horns and Cloven feet If a man come from a Countrey Village and be made by Covenant a Citizen of London how prove you that he renounceth King or Kingdom But he saith p. 9. Those who wilfully separate from the Corporation to which the Charter was granted forfeit their Interest in the Charter Ans. What Reader doth this man presume upon that will not ask him how he proveth 1. That Gods Law or Charter to his Church doth not require them to congregate in distinct single Churches as London Charter doth to erect several Companies and the Universities several Colledges 2. And that God hath not in his Word given order or command for such single Churches But that the Apostles and Titus by fixing Elders to their several Churches and Cities separated from the Universal Church 3. And that their subordinate Churches have not need of distinct subordinate consent and duty And that our Diocesan Churches all separate from the Universal Did he think these things need no proof at all It may be he will say that the Diocesan depend on the Vniversal but the Presbyterian or Independent do not ● Answer Dependance is either that of Subjects on Soveraign or Magistrates for Government or that of a Community of Equals for Communion In the former respect they depend on none but Christ as Universal Soveraign Nor on any Foriegners for Governments In the latter they depend on all true Churches for Communion And Doctor Hammond and most Diocesans hitherto have said that Diocesan Churches are thus far Independent or National at most And if any be for a Forreign Jurisdiction in Charity before they perswade England to it they should procure them a Dispensation from all the Oaths that have sworn all this Kingdom against endeavouring any change of Government and against a Foreign Jurisdiction For some Fanaticks now Dream that PER is the Mark of the Beast and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the number of his Name is nominal as well as numeral and refers to CH-urch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and S Tate For as for them that find a mans name in them I abhorr their Exposition more § 11. p. 9. God saith he hath not made any Covenant in particular with the Church of Geneva France or England c. A. 1. God hath made one General Law for Christians congregating with their fixed Elders or Bishops in particular Churches all the World over And his Command is not without Promise of being with them to the End of the World and that Promise becometh a Promise to every Church so congregate God hath not made distinct Laws or Promises to every Christian But the
Communion with this or that particular Church it is not true 1. A Traveller of another Country who on his journey communicateth with every Church where he passeth is not a fixed Member of that Church for 1. The Pastor or Bishop hath not that peculiar Charge of him as of fixed members 2. He is not bound where he passeth to take such notice of the lives of Communicants or Pastors and to admonish the Offenders and tell the Church as fixed members are 3. He hath not the right in chooseing Pastors or Deacons as the fixed Members have 4. An itinerant Bishop in transitu is not their fixed Bishop ergo an Iterant Lay-man is not a fixed Member The same I may say of one that is a fixed member of another Church in the same City and cometh to that only to signifie universal Communion or neighbourly which though he deny to be lawful I shall further prove anon And the same I may say of those that dwell where there is no fixed single Church at all for want of a Pastor but they congregate only when some strange Minister passeth through the Town CHAP. IV. His third Case § 1. PAge 48 49. He resolveth his third Case Whether it be lawful to Communicate with two distinct and separate Churches negatively and saith It is contrary to all the Principles of Church Communion as any thing can possibly be it is to be contrary to our selves it is Communicating with Schism That the Presbyterian and Independent Churches have made an actual separation from the Church of England he hath evidently proved and they are Schismaticks and to communicate with them is to partake in their Schism and if Schism be a great sin and that which will damn us as soon as Adultery and Murther then it must needs be a dangerous thing to communicate with Schismaticks And p. 42. There cannot be two distinct Churches in one place one for occasional and another for constant Communion without Schism Ans. To save those that are willing from the Poyson of these Schismatical Doctrines lapt up in confusion by men that abhor distinction or understand not what they say I will first lay down that truth that he sights against with convincing evidence and then shew you the mischief of his false Doctrine and Application § 2. The confusion of these words Church Communion Separation and Schism which every one signifie divers things is the chief means to blind and deceive his Reader whether it do so by himself I know not I. The Word Church signifieth sometime the universal Church sometime a single Organized Church as part of it and sometime humane combinations of such single Churches and that into Diocesan Classical Provincial Patriarchal National and Papal II. The Specification and Nomination of Churches is from the formal cause and the proper Government is that form And the Individuation is from matter and form but principally from the form III. The Union of Pastor and Flock in Relation makes that which is a form aptitudinal as the Soul to the Body to be the form in act as the Union of Soul and Body and Gods command and consent with the consent of the necessary relate and correlate cause that union IV. Union is in order to Communion which is primary by the exercise of the formal powers on the matter and secondary by the action of all the parts according to their several capacities and Offices V. The Union of the Church is of divers degrees 1. The formal Union of the Head and Body which maketh it essentially the Christian Church 2. The Vnion of the parts among themselves as Christian which maketh them a Body capable of Union with the Head 3. The Union of the parts as unequal Organized the Official with the rest which maketh it an Organized Body fit for its special use and welfare 4. Union in integrity of parts which maketh it an intire Body 5. Union in due temperament and Qualities which maketh it a healthful Body 6. Unity in Commou Accidents which make it a Comely Beautiful Body joined with the rest But 7. Union in mutable Accidents is unnecessary and impossible VI. These several degrees of Union are found in Bodies natural and Politick 1. The Union of Soul and Body makes a man and an Embryo before it be organized 2. The Union of the Body maketh it capable of the Souls further Operation 3. The Union of the Organical chief parts as Heart Lungs c. to the rest make it a true humane Body compleated to the nutriment and action of Life 4. That it have Hands and Fingers Feet and Toes and all integral parts makes it an intire Body 5. The due site temperament and qualities of each part make it a sound Body 6. Comely colour hair action going speech c. make it a comely Body 7. To have all parts of equal quantity and office would make it uncomely And to have the same hair colour c. is unnecessary at all 1. The Union of King and Subjects as such makes a Kingdom 2. That the People be agreed for one conjunct interest and Government maketh them a Community capable of Politie or Government 3. That there be Judges Maiors and Justices and subordinate Cities or Societies maketh it an Organized Body in which Kingly Government may be exercised to its end the common good 4. That no profitable part be wanting Judge Justice Sheriff c. maketh it an entire Kingdom 5. That all know their place and be duly qualified with Wisdom Love Justice Conscience Obedience to God first to the Sovereign Power next to Officers next c. maketh it a sound and safe Kingdom 6. That it be well situate fertile rich eminent in Learning Skill c. maketh it an adorned beautiful Kingdom 7. That all be equal in Power and wealth is destructive and that all be of one Age complexion calling temper degree of knowledge c. is impossible And that all have the same language cloathing utensils c. is needless at least VII Jesus Christ is the only Universal Soveraign of the Church both of vital influence and Government nor hath he set up any under him either Monarchical Aristocratical Democratical or mixt Pope Council or diffused Clergy that hath the Power of Legislation and Judgment as governing the whole Chorch but only Officers that per partes govern it among them each in his Province as Justices do the Kingdom and Kings and States the World nor is any capable of more VIII To set up any universal Legislators and Judge Pope or Council is to set up an Usurper of Christs Prerogative called by many a Vice-Christ or an Antichrist and as bad as making one man or Senate the Soveraign of all the Earth and to attempt the setting up of such or any forreign Jurisdiction in this Land is to endeavour to perjure the whole Kingdom that is sworn against it in the Oath of Supremacy and sworn never to endeavour any alteration of Government in Church
Churches are in the same City and Diocess Of their agreement and dependance on the same Bishop I shall speak anon XXXIX 3. In case that in one City there be resident Stranges that are sent on Embassies or live for Merchandize or flee from Miseries and are the Subject of other Princes whose Laws and Customs they are under e. g. At Frankford Hamburgh Middleburgh Dantzick Const●●●nople there have been English distinct lawful Churches And in London there are Dutch and French Churches And if the King allowed a Swedish Church a Danish Church a Saxon Church c. with their several Bishops who is so weak as to need proof that this is lawful and they true Churches XL. 4. In case men of different Language are not capable of mutual converse by personal communion or help As Dutch French Italian Greeks Germans c. Grotius and Dr. Hammond oft in Dissert and Annot. do maintain that Peter at Rome had a Church of Jews and Paul a Church of Gentiles And that the like distribution of Churches of Jews and Gentiles there was at Antioch Alexandria and other places And by this they Salve the Contradictions in Church History about the Succession of Linus Cletus and Clemens And the Apostles setled not a sinful Church way XLI 5. Yea Grotius maintaineth that the Apostles setled the Churches at first not like the Jewish Priesthood but in the order of their Synagogues de Imper. sum Patest and in Annot. And that as there were divers Synagogues in a great City with their Archisynagogus and Elders so there were divers Churches in a City with Bishops and Presbyters XLII 6. When there are a greater number of Persons in one City o● precinct than can have any just personal Knowledge and Communion and more than any one Bishop with his Presbytery can perform the needful Pastoral oversight to it is lawful and a duty to gather another Church in that City or Precinct But this is truly the Case of many great Cities though wordly Wisdom have at Rome and other places oft denyed notorious evidence and experience He that will gather up all the duties that Dr. Hammond saith were charged on the Bishops in his Annotations on all the Texts that name Elders and Bishops if he can believe that any Bishop can perform the tenth part of them to all in the Diocess of London York Lincoln Norwich c. I will not dispute against him if he maintain a Bishops U●iquity or that at once he can be in twenty places But if they say that what then was commanded them to do personally they may do by others I say that if they may change the Work they may change the Power that specifieth the Office and so it is not the same Office in specie instituted in Scripture And then Lay-men may have Power to preach and administer Sacraments and do the Office of Priest and yet be no Priest as Civilians do of Bishops which is a Contradiction Certainly if there be more Scholars in the City than one Master can Teach and Rule it is no Schism to set up more Schools and Schoolmasters but a duty And if the Lord Mayor on pretence of City Government should put down but as great a part of Family Government as those Diocesans do of Parochial Church Goverment who allow none under them to be truly Episcopi Grigis and have the power of their Church Keyes I think that it were no Sch●m to restore Families so that the City might have more than one entirely XLIII 7. If the Soveraign Power upon Politick or Religious Reasons should determine that e. g. Dr. A and Dr. B and Dr. C. shall all be Bishops in London to such Volunteers of Clergy and Laity as shall choose each of them to be their Bishop and this without altering their dwellings no man can prove it sinful And of his reasons the King is judge XLIV 8. If the Bishop or Clergy of a City Diocess or Nation do agree by Law or Canon to admit none to the Ministry or Communion that will not commit a known sin deliberately as the Condition of his Communion it is a duty to congregate under other Pastors in those prec●●cts This is confest If they should not only hold any errour or practise sin but require men to subscribe and approve it and say it is no sin no man ought to do this nor yet to live like an Atheist and forsake all Worship because men forbid him if it were but to subscribe one untruth But alas this is no rare Case In one Emperours Reign all were Anathematized that subscribed not to the Council of Chalcedon and quickly after all that did or that would not renounce it The same division and changes were made by the Councils against and for the Monothelites de tribus Captrulis Images c. And when all Men living have many Errours and the Church of England disclaimeth her Infallibility and yet will receive no Minister that will not subscribe that there is nothing in her Books contrary to the word of God the Case is hard But when all the things mentioned in the Plea for Peace are proved lawful we shall be more yielding in this Case XLV 9. If true and sound Christians mistakingly think one or many things to be heinous sins as Perjury Lying Renouncing Obedience to God and Repentance c. which are things indifferent but of so great difficulty that most Learned and Godly and Willing Men cannot discern the Lawfulness and agree and yet are not necessary nor just conditions of Ministry or Communion and so it is the Imposer that entangleth them by difficulty in their dissent it is not lawful for these men therefore to forbear all Church Worship but mi●●t use it as they can XLVI 10. If any Church unjustly excommunicate such men or others they must not forbear all Church order and worship because men so excommunicate them No man must Sin to escape Excommunication and every man in the World is a sinner And therefore all the World must be excommunicated if all Sinners must be so As I before said the times oft were when almost all the Bishops in the Empire were excommunicated by one another Councils and Popes have oft excommunicated some for trifles and some for Truth and Duty And such must not therefore renounce all Church Worship and Communion The Church of England do by their standing Law ipso facto excommunicate all as aforesaid that affirm any thing to be repugnant to Gods Word or sinful in their whole Church Government Articles Liturgy and Ceremonies and so to stand till they Publickly revoke this as a wicked Errour Now many Lords and Commoners in Parliaments have spoken against some of these particulars and some out of Parliament Many Ministers have done the like when the King Commissioned them to treat for Alterations And many when the Accusations or demands of others have called them to give a Reason of their Actions Some have maintained that it is
in their Succession from Schismaticall Bishops at Constan● Alex●nd Antioch Jerusalem c. and in their excommunicating not only the Church of 〈◊〉 for a wrong cause the silioque but other Churches and for divers Acts of Schism 52. They must by their Principles Separate from the 〈…〉 and all the Eastern and Southern Churches that are called 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 For Councils and other Churches condemn them And they condemn the Councils of Ephesus and Calceden and all since And they must separate from and condemn the Churches of 〈…〉 c. be●ause they separate from others and are separated from 53. Their Principles utterly unchurch the Church of Rome 1. Especially because it is guilty of the greatest Schism on earth by setting up a false Church form and head 2. And because they Schismatically condemn and U●church three parts of the Church on earth even all save their Sect 3. And for their many other Schismatical Doctrines and Practices 4. And as being condemned by the Greek Protestants and most Churches and separated from by the Church of England which they own 54. They separate in Principles from all or near all General Councils save the first as having separated from other Councils and condemned them and being again condemned by them 55. Some of them condemn and separate from all the Protestant Churches that have Bishops in Sweden Denmark Germany Transylvania c. because they had not their Ordination Successively from Bishops but Presbyters at the Reformation And because they have been guilty of Schism against others 56. The Principles of Mr. Dodwel and his Associates condemn the Church of England as Schismatical 1. Those that claim Succession from Rome whose own Succession hath been oft and long interrupted by incapacities and Schisms 2. For holding Communion with those Protestant Churches which these men call Schismaticks 57. They condemn and separate from all the Churches called Presbyte●ian in France Holland Geneva Scotland formerly and those in 〈◊〉 that have no Bishops Th● some would threat kindness on them by saying that they would have them and cannot And why cannot they 58. Their Principles make the Bishop of Oxford Br●●●l c. Schismaticks For their Dioceses are Churches taken out of Churches being 〈◊〉 parts of other Dioceses 59. And they condemn all the Parish Churches in England as Churches distinct from Cathedrals For they are all Churches gathered out of Churches At first the Cathedrals were the only single Churches Next Monasteries were gathered and next our Parish Churches And the Parish Church of Covent-garden is a Church taken out of a Church 60. Their Principles damn St. Martin that separated to the death from all the Bishops Synods and them that were near him save one Man because they perswaded Maximus to use the Sword against Priscillian 〈◊〉 and brought men of strict Religion under Suspicion of Priscillianism And sure the ruined persecuted Protestants here are more Orthodox than the Priscillians And they damn Gildas that told the English Clergy that he was not ex●mius Christianus that would call then Ministers Do they not disgrace the many Churches dedicated to the Memory of St. Martin if he be a damned man I doubt they damn Paul and Barnabas for local angry separating from each other Whatever they do by Peter and Barnabas for the Separation blamed Gal. 2. 61. If all are Schismaticks that here conform not all those called Conformists are such that conform to the words in a false sence 62. They separate from all that obey the twentieth Canon of the Nicene Council And from all that obey the Councils that forbid communicating with a Fornicating Priest And from all that obey the Councils which nullifie the Episcopacy of such as are obtruded by Magistrates or not consented to by the Clergy and People And many more such Abundance more instances of their Separation and Damnation I might adde In a word I think their Principles are as I first said for damning and separating from all men living for all men living are gulity of some sort and degree of Schism that is of Errours Principles or Practices in which they culpably Violate that Union and Concord that should be among Christians and Churches Every defect of Christian Love and every sinful Errour is some degree of such a violation All Christians differ in as great matters as things indifferent And no man living knoweth all things Indifferent to be such And these men distinguish not of Schism nor will take notice of the necessary distinctions given in the third Part of the Treatise of Church Concord And solu●io cont●nut causeth pain nor do they at all make us understand what sort of Separation it is that they fasten on but talk of Separation in general as aforesaid LXXXVII They seem to be themselves deceived by the Papists in exposition of Cyprians words de Vnit. Eccles. Vnus est Episcopatus c. But they themselves seem to separate from Cyprian as a Schismatick and consequently from all the Church that hath profest Communion with him and with all the Councils and Churches that joyned with him For Cyprien and his Council erred by going too far from the Schism and Heresie of others nulli●ying all their Baptisms Ordinations and Communions And for this errour they declared against the Judgment of the Bishop of Rome and other Churches and they were for it condemned as Schismaticks by the said Bishop And here is a far wider Separation than we can be charged with 2. And Cyprians words came from the Mind that was possest with these opinions and are expressive of his Inclination 3. Yet they are true and good understood as he himself oft expounds them the Bishop of Oxford●iteth ●iteth some instances many more are obvious in which he opposeth the Bishop of Rome saying that none of them pretendeth to ●e a Bishop of Bishops and limiting every man to his own Province and saying that they were to give account to none but God with much the like But in what sence is Episcopacie one 1. Undoubtedly not as 〈◊〉 in the personal Subjectum Relationts One Bishop is not another if you should say 〈◊〉 is One none believe that one mans Relation of Paternity is anothers The Relation is an accident of its own Subject as well as Quantity Quality c. 2. Nor doth any man believe that many Bishops go to make up one Bishop in Naturals 3. Nor did ever Cyprian hold or say that all Bishops go to make up one Politick Governing Aristocracie as many go to make one Senate or Parliament that hath a power of Legislation and Judgment by Vote as one Persona politica He never owned such a humane Soveraignty But Episcop●●us unus est 1. In specie all Bishops have one Office 2. Object●●● As the Catholick Church is one whose welfare all Bishops ought to seek 3. And so sinaliter as to the ●emote End and are bound to endeavour Concord 4. And as effects all are from one efficient institutor As it may be