the Church insisting long in charging many crimes upon men particularly upon Cecilianus and Osius which they could never be able to make out although they alleaged that such faults were cloaked by the Catholicks and that they were not to be communicated with In this case the Orthodox took three wayes to remove such a difference 1. By pleading forbearance of awakening such contests and exhorting rather to keep union than to hazard to break it upon such grounds and so as Augustine saith ut quaedam incerta crimina pro certa pace Deo dimitterentur Cont. Epist. Parm. lib. 1. cap. 3. 2. If that could not be acquiesced in they admitted the thing to proof over and over again that by lawfull triall it might be decided as we will find in the former instances the same case of Cecilianus was often tryed even after he was absolved It is true the Donatists did not acquiesce but did separate for which cause they were ever accounted most grosse Schismaticks yet is it of it self a way wherein men may satisfyingly acquiesce A third way sometimes used was That when divisions were like to be occasioned by dissatisfaction with a particular person against whom things could not be judicially made out so as to found a Sentence nor yet possibly was there so full satisfaction with him in every thing as by owning of him to hazard a rent where a people were stumbled by him they did without judiciall processing or Censuring interpose with the Bishop to cede and wrote to the people to choose another So in that Council of Carthage Canon 91. letters are written to Maximianus called Episcopus Bagiensis and the people that he might cede the Bishoprick and they might choose another yet there is no mention of any made-out accusation or Sentence but that for the good of the Church Synodo placuit c. There is mention made elswhere in history of a Bishop of that place of that name who had been a Donatist and did return to the communion of the Church but if this be he or what was the cause of this appointment is neither certain nor of great concernment in this A third sort of contests of this kind are When crimes are grosse and clear and men are either justly censurable or Censured some possibly honestly minded may be engaged to do for them by their insinuating upon them and giving misinformations and prejudices and so be brought to endeavour the preventing or removing of Sentences against or from such as justly deserve the same In this case we find a threefold way of composure 1. An endeavour used to clear to others the justice of such a Sentence when it hath been traduced Thus when Basilides and Martialis were justly deposed by a Synod of Spain they did by false pretexts engage the Clergie of Rome to owne them and write for their recovery which did exceedingly offend the Bishops of Spain whereupon they wrote to Cyprian and these in Africk for advice who being met in the Synod approved their deposition and advised them not to readmit them because none such who had any blemish and were not holy ought to minister in the holy things and that rather they should bear with Stephanus his mistake who out of ignorance and misinformation was led to side with such Thus Cyprian hath it in his Epistles to the Church of Spain Epist. 68. So that schism was stopped and the Churches continued to acknowledge the lawfully ordained Bishops that succeeded these And the readmission of such had neither been in it self lawfull nor yet had compassed the end of obtaining peace in these Churches where the people was stumbled by their carriages A second way was When the men were orthodox and profitable though failing in some grosse particular yet when they were owned by others in the Church Synods did not stand for concord to remove such Sentences as was formerly instanced in the case of Ostus Augustine also in a certain Epistle 164. doth approve the not-censuring of one Optatus lest thereby a schism should be occasioned because of manies adhering to him We will find also a third way That when men have been Sentenced and some have continued to owne them and others to oppose them such have been brought to submit themselves and so the division hath been removed It was so in that hot contest that continued long between the Bishops of Rome and the Church of Africk in the case of Apiratus Bishop of Sica c. who being deposed by the Synod of Carthage was pressed to be admitted by the Bishops of Rome whom by no means these of Africk would admit at last these that were Sentenced came to acknowledge the Sentence whereby the division was stopped A fourth sort of contests or divisions for matters of fact is When both sides have had their failings in a time of darknesse and tentation some one way and some another and after some breathing they fall by mutual upbraidings to hazard the Churches peace one casting up this fault to him and he again upbraiding him with another The way taken to prevent this is most satisfying when both acknowledging their own guilt to other did forgive one another and joyn cordially for the good of the work In the debates with the Donatists there is much mention made not without great commendation of the practice of a Synod which is called Concilium Cirtense wherein the members did mutually confesse their faults and saith he to wit Augustine in the conference formerly cited Sibi invicem ignoscebant ne schisma fieret And by the scope of the Catholicks in urging that example and by the vehemency used by the Donatists in denying the same it would seem that they looked upon this as a most excellent and satisfying way of removing differences amongst godly men when every one acknowledgeth their own fault and doth not upbraid but forgive one another endeavouring to have the rememberance of bypast miscarriages rather forgiven and buried in oblivion than mentioned Because good men being but men usually there are failings on both sides and the denying of it provoketh others to insist the more thereon as the acknowledging thereof doth stop the upbraiding of them with the same and usually it is to be seen that the best men had rather mention their own faults in their acknowledgements than hear the same done by any other Beza Epist. 23. also hath such an advice as this to a Church that had fallen into division Utinam utraque pars acquiescere malit quam si curiose nimium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quis sit in majori culpa inquiratur CHAP. XIII What to do toward uniting in divisions arising from diversity of circumstances in external administrations and especially arising from Church-government A Third matter that occasioneth divisions is a diversity in Worship Ceremonies or things that relate to externall administration of Ordinances when some follow one way in Preaching administrating of
extraordinary manner was laid aside by the Lord did dispute that possibly there might be some more than an ordinary thing in his way and that he might through accesse to God do such things when as yet they were not infected with his errours This did breed a schism when others necessarily behoved to condemn the deeds and also the persons as not serving the Lord but their own bellies Rom. 16. ver 16 17. 4. It usually ariseth from secret grudges at being sleighted or heart-burnings at anothers credit and reputation beyond them and sometimes indeed not because of the fact done but because such persons were the doers thereof and one way or other springeth from the root of pride envy or emulation which hath many branches whereby it venteth its malignant distempering disposition in sundry shapes It is indeed sad that such things should be amongst the Disciples of Christ yet often we see that this Who should be the greatest was a bone of contention among them especially when some had evidenced their too great pronenesse and inclination to prefer themselves to others This also had influence upon that muteny which Aaron and Miriam did stir up against Moses Numb 12. and it is the Lords word by the wise mouth of Solomon Only by pride cometh contention 5. Too much insisting on and aggreging of the infirmities or opinions of others and loadening and aggreging them with many fearfull consequences hath much influence upon this especially where words are wrested beside the intention and sense of the speaker because such an humour sheweth little love and respect to the person and by the nature of the work doth tend to hold him forth as odious ignorant absurd or some way despicable which even good men being but men are not easily brought to digest We see this in Iob's friends who frequently carp at his expressions and study to aggrege them which indeed were not alway altogether excusable yet their scope at least in the work was to represent them and him much more absurd than indeed they were And this was in these debates between Augustine and Ierome and usually is where such differences are as too many reproachfull and bitter differences now in the Church almost every where do hold forth 6. They are occasioned by a carnal and factiouslike pleading for and vindicating even of Truth Often it is not the matter whereabout godly and learned men debate that maketh division for there may be difference where there is no division but it is a carnal manner of prosecuting either side of the difference even that side whereon the truth doth lye that doth engender the division and often we see men differing about greater points than others do and yet carrying so as it cannot be called Division It 's marked 1 Cor. 3. that some were for Paul some for Apollos some were for none but Christ and yet this is counted a side of the faction aswell as any of the other not because being for Christ is wrong but because that factiously they walked under that pretext Which we may take up in these respects 1. When a man too peremptorily presseth his light upon others or upon a Church in a matter that is not fundamental or necessary which is condemned Rom. 14. 22. when men in these debates keep not their faith or light to themselves but do trouble and distract others therewith 2. It is when men too vehemently presse such a thing as if the contrary thereof or those who maintain the same were intolerable and so in a fiery violent way seek to bear down that which is indeed an errour though of infirmity It is marked by some that write Church-history and Augustine is of that same mind That Stephanus Bishop of Rome did more hurt to the Church by his too vehement opposing of Cyprian's errour which was That those that were baptized by Hereticks or Schismaticks ought again to be baptized because he did therby hazard the dividing and renting of the Church by refusing communion with such as were against him than Cyprian did in his maintaining of his errour Because though it was still his opinion he did meekly and condescendingly carry in it with respect to the unity of the Church 3. This is also when things are followed with Sentences and Censures on the opposit opinion and the abbetters thereof as if it were a matter of Faith It 's known what influence those Sentences of Victor Bishop of Rome had upon renting of the Church and stating that divisive distinction betwixt the East and West Church and that for a matter of nothing to wit What day of the moneth precisely Easter was to be keeped and he was for that sharply reproved even by Iraeneus who was of that same judgment with him And many such instances are in History 4. It is when in the prosecution of such things men leave the matter and fall on personall reflections and become bitter in these respects as to cast-up pride and arrogancy hypocrisie ignorance heresie or erroneousnesse or some other personal fault if any be known or imputed to them or one way or other to sleight them and make them despicable So Aaron and Miriam murmur against Moses Numb 12. that he had married an Ethiopian woman that he seemed to sleight them as if God had only spoken by him and not by them also Epiphaneus also did upbraid Chrysostom with hypocrisie Ierome hugely revileth Vigilantius whose tenents seem to be as near truth as his are so it was between Demetrius and Theophilus when in the matter of fact each giveth to other the lie 5. It is when the manner of carrying on a thing is factious as endeavouring to make sides and parties under hand and indirect dealing to engage others in their differences and to stir up men by such means against others It is like it was so in Corinth even amongst the people who adhered not to false teachers It is marked also in that vehement bitter contention that was between Ierome and Ruffinus that he did endeavour by all means to waken hatred against Ieromes person and to defame his writings more than in any convincing way to make out his point and yet all this arose from Ierome his alleaging the other to be a favourer of Origens heresie because he had translated some books of Origens which was indeed condemned by others as being dangerous yet seing Ruffinus did disclaim these errours and deny that he approved them there was no such ground to presse him with iâ—… and this became the occasion of that irreconciliable hatred which was never removed in which also it is marked that Ierome doth object to the other obscurity and harshnesse of stile adding withall many other sleighting expressions 7 It may be by the imprudencie of such as have good affection As 1. expressing too much good liking of some corrupt men because they pretend fairly Thus the Church was divided in Phrygia for Montanus because some
party and to keep them at a greater distance from the other as being grosse in receiving Traditores as they called them unto their society Sometimes men justly censured or fearing censure from faithfull Bishops did spread calumnies against them and made them odious under pretext of their pride arrogance unsoundnesse and such like even unto other orthodox men Sometimes again time-serving men by flattering Magistrates did execute their revenge against faithfull Bishops by keeping up Divisions against them driving on Sentences of Deposition and such like under pretext of other faults whereby the Churches peace hath been often marred and her divisions continued as is clear in those schisms and divisions at Constantinople first in reference to Chrysostom and afterward in reference to Ignatius who by a faction in the Church was deposed really to please the Emperour whose incestuous marriage he would not approve as they did therefore I say in the removing of differences and resolving of duties in reference to union there is great need of circumspectnesse in trying and choosing whose counsels are to be laid weight upon for all men love not peace neither seek singly the good of the Church and want not their own prejudices and grudgings at particular eminent persons who where men are not very denied and mortified will easily steal-in to mar a publick good under pretext of particular respect to the person whom by so doing they stir up It 's marked by Sleydan as the cause of that unreasonable and unnatural division that brake-out and grew in Germany almost to the undoing of Religion therein betwixt the Elector of Saxony and Maurice afterward Elector that some Counsellors not well-minded to Religion but favourers of the wicked way of Henry to whom Maurice succeeded who for that cause had hatred at the Elector and those who were eminent for Reformation and now having taken on a profession and insinuated themselves in the counsels and affection of Maurice and finding some begun matter of dissention in other particulars did so kindle and foster it till they brought the division to that height that one part of the Protestants were engaged with Antichrist and his followers to destroy the other and yet so closely carried that the difference was never stated upon the real account which indeed such did intend Also men not so nearly concerned in the Churches divisions as suppose they be of another Church or men not so immediately concerned in the debates thereof and the effects that follow thereupon As in that Council of Carthage they enact that tendernesse be used to the Donatists and means be used to reclaim them and for that end did acknowledge their Ministers though ordained in a schism to be Ministers although the Church of Rome did write otherwayes to them and did act otherwayes themselves These would be looked unto Sometimes also there are a sort of persons who long not for union for as there is an itching after new doctrine in some so is there for divisions and changes amongst others who may be sound in doctrine who in this are to be adverted to 2. Men would eschew in such a case judicially to engage in such differences either by passing decisions in these things pro or contra in Judicatories or by censuring or noting with any reproach such as differ from them For 1. that maketh the division the more difficultly removable in it self And 2. it engageth both sides the more and proveth a let to retiring when men would and heighteneth the difference exceedingly In that difference that was between Cyprian and Stephanus and other Bishops of Rome concerning the rebaptizing of such as had been baptized by Hereticks and Schismaticks It is marked that Stephanus did presse the condemnation of it did censure and refuse communion with such as joyned with Cyprian in his opinion On the contrary Cyprian did indeed call Synods and decide but neither pressed any man to his opinion or practice nor Censured any that differed in such a matter And because his carriage is so much commended by the Ancients especially by Augustine against the Donatists not because he counted Cyprian right on the matter for he disclaimed that and owned the contrary opinion but because he carried in his opinion so tenderly to the Churches union and peace We shall observe two or three passages of his and of Augustines concerning him 1. In his Epistle ad Jubiannum Haec rescripsimus inquit nemiâ—… praescribentes aut praejudicantes quo minus unusquisque Episcoporum quod putat faciat Et ne quisquam pellendus à caeterorum consortio videretur dicit nos quantum in nobis est propter haereticos cum collegis Coepiscopis nostris non contendimus cum quibus aivinam concordiam pacem tenemus Et Paulo post Serventur inquit à nobis patienter leniter charitas animi collegii honor vinculum fidei concordia sacerdotii Which words and many others are cited by Augustine de Baptismo lib. 6. cap. 17. And in another place when he hath cited this same last Sentence and other words giving the reason which the Apostle hath 1 Cor. 11. If any man will be contentious we have no such custome nor the Churches of God after which a little Augustine subjoyneth this approbation of his carriage Majus quippe in eo robur virtutis eminuit cum ist a quaestio nondum discuss a nutaret quod aliter sentiens quam multi collegae tantam moderationem obtinuit ut Ecclesiae Dei sanctam societatem nulla schismatis labe truncaret quam si omnia non solum veraciter sed etiam pariter sine ista virtute sentiret De Baptismo lib. 5. cap. 17. This he saith even though Cyprians opinion was confirmed by diverse Councels of Carthage Which sheweth what influence such abstinence hath on the Churches peace which is the more observable that he used this forbearance when he had the generality of the Church of Africk and the authority of their Councels for him and also was provoked by the vehemency of his opposits and their Censuring such as were of his opinion yet he forbare not because he doubted of the soundnesse of his judgement but because he respected the Churches peace and even then did he write sweetly in many Epistles and a particular treatise pressing the unity of the Church for which he is eminently esteemed of as an excellent pattern in such a case by all sober and judicious men 3. In such cases when union is desired men would abstain the propagating of their opinions in any purposed and publick way This is not to restrain a mans sober christian and necessary vindicating of himself in a due way But 1. All unnecessary traffick that is principally for strengthening of a party 2. Publishing in print things to that purpose when there is no conveniency for the Churches good 3. Making motions in Judicatories that awakens siding 4. Insisting thereon in publick preaching And lastly When there is some
mis-informed And it 's observable that the most peaceable Synods who did most for union as those in Africk and that of Spain who had received Osius because of the Churches of France their interposing by that to prevent a schism yet were they most peremptory as it were in this and refused to receive Barsilides and Martialis as that of Carthage did refuse Apiarius notwithstanding that Rome interposed for them giving this reason That there was a necessity of having the Churches provided with faithfull and holy Ministers 4. Sometimes and oftentimes men sentenced though possibly with too much rigidity if not with injustice have yet submitted with respect to the Churches peace either totally and upon that ground have again been admitted or partially by abstaining to act any thing contrary to such a Sentence but for reverence thereunto waiting for some legal redresse as in history is frequent and it is fit it should be so in such cases where the hurt is particular and proceedeth not from a common design of undoing all faithfull Ministers because the making of a schism doth more hurt than the contending for their particular Ministery doth edifie in such a case and therefore sometimes though some men have been pressed to under value an unjust Sentence and to continue to officiate notwithstanding Yet out of respect to Church-authority and order have refused till they should be admitted orderly unto the same Indeed when the Arians drave on the deposition of their most eminent opposers it was otherwayes because as is marked in the Councill of Sardica in bearing down of them they endeavoured to bear down the truth which they maintained But where the controversie is not such but the men orthodox and sound on both sides though possibly there may be some particular faults or mistakes in such a case it is safer for either side to cede in part or wholly than to keep up a division and we conceive when one side cedeth not if the other should cede wholly it would be most to the advantage of their cause and to the commendation and strengthening of their authority in the Churches of Christ. The other occasion of bebate in such Church-matters is upon the defect that is when some are really or are thought to be connivers at guiltie men or at least defective in putting of them to triall others again may be thought too forward and precipitant in that whereupon ariseth difference and if one cede not to another it becometh the occasion of division as may be seen in instances formerly given Concerning which we say 1. That men would remember this is but one particular of many that tend to the Churches good though indeed a main particular and so ought not to be the rise of a division nor of continuing thereof to the marring of the Churches peace in other things but men ought singly to do their duty and therein to acquiesce without partaking of the faults of others whether it be by being defective or by exceeding in that mater and seing there may be no corrupt design in either who may be upon these extreames it would not be so highly aggreaged on either side 2. We say that as often difference in this may breed divisions so again divisions do occasion mens differing more in this and it cannot be expected where division is that men who are men and subject to be byassed can be so single in receiving testimonies of the innocency of these that differ from them or of the guiltinesse of these that agree with them as if there were no division at all And again it is impossible that where there is a difference in some other thing that men can think others differing from them so single and unbyassed as they suppose themselves to be but are still ready to construct their differing from them in this to be occasioned from some former prejudice for as was said division breedeth jealousie suspicion and distrust among men and men are naturally inclined to suspect that others drive the design of strengthening themselves by the sentencing of such a person whereby they are secretly induced even unawares to disappoint such a supposed unstreight end which maketh them on both sides suspect every thing dispute every thing and readily reject every thing that cometh from the other 3. We say therefore that union would not be suspended upon satisfaction in this but rather union would be pressed that satisfaction in this may be attained because satisfaction in this cannot be expected till there be mutuall confidence of one anothers integrity and till there be some walking together and some further evidence of the sincerity of each other in the main businesse this mutuall confidence cannot be expected and again this cannot be obtained without an union and so consequently union would be laid as a foundation for attaining of satisfaction even in this 4. It would be considered that oftentimes such apprehensions of extremities which are imputed to honest and zealous men are most groundlesse but there being something in them as men it is conceived on the other hand because of secretly entertained jealousie to be much more There was nothing more casten up to the Orthodox by the Novatians and Donatists than that they were defective in this in admitting to and retaining in the Ministery men that were corrupt Yet after many trials they were never able to prove what they alleaged upon some eminent persons when it came to triall even when such things were generally accounted true amongst them This would be adverted that every general rumour be not accounted a truth especially in the times of division for so few of the most eminent on both sides should be innocent Again on the other side it occasioned much heat against Chrysostom that he had censured many of his Bishops and threatened many of his Clergie this did exceedingly provoke envy against him and made such men to vent many calumnies on him which were too much regarded even by some orthodox and good men who differed from him upon another account as Epiphanius did upon the occasion of Origens writings yet in no history it is recorded that he aimed at the censuring of any unjustly though he did censure with a naturall vehemency as he did every other thing but the history saith men spake much of the number of these that were sentenced by him and of the vehemency of his manner in reproving and censuring of their faults which they accounted to be pride not considering the faults for which he did censure them But men having conceived prejudice at him were the readier to admit of their accusations against him as if they had been unjustly dealt with by him and upon that same ground of prejudice at him were the more inclinable to restore them whom he sentenced 5. It is to be considered also That zeal against such as are justly censurable is most consistent with a spirit of union in the Church as appeareth by the
for parts and ability and that it be not done in vain as Paul hath it Gal. 2. 2. And it 's observable that he speaketh this in reference to his way when he intended the evidencing of his agreement with the chief Apostles in the matter of doctrine Also we find meeknesse and instructing put together when there is any expectation to recover one from a difference 2 Tim. 2. 15. and convincing or disputing is more especially applicable to these of whom there is little hope out of respect to the edification of others Hence we find the Apostles disputing with false teachers in some points of truth but rather intreating and exhorting Believers to have peace amongst themselves notwithstanding of lesser differences A second way of composure is when such agreement in judgment cannot be obtained To endeavour a harmony and keep unity notwithstanding of that difference by a mutual forbearance in things controverted which we will find to be of two sorts The first is to say so total that is when neither side doth so much as doctrinally in word writ or Sentences of Judicatories presse any thing that may confirm or propagate their own opinion or condemn the contrary But do altogether abstract from the same out of respect to the Churches peace and for the preventing of scandal and do in things wherein they agree according to the Apostle's direction Philip. 3. 16. Walk by the same rule and minde the same things mutually as if there were no such differences and waiting in these till the Lord shall reveal the same unto them This way is safe where the doctrine upon which the difference is is such as the forbearing the decision thereof doth neither mat any duty that the Church in general is called to nor endanger the salvation of souls through the want of clearness therein nor in a word infer such inconveniences to the hurt of the Church as such unseasonable awakening and keeping up of differences and divisions may have with it Because the scope of bringing forth every truth or confirming the same by any authoritative sanction c. is the edification of the Church and therefore when the bringing forth thereof doth destroy more than edifie it is to be forborn Neither can it be ground enough to plead for such decisions in preaching that the thing they preach-for is truth and the thing they condemn is errour Because 1. it is not the lawfulnesse of the thing simply that is in question but the necessity and expediency thereof in such a case Now many things are lawfull that are not expedient 1 Cor. 10. 23. 2. In these differences that were in the primitive times concerning meats dayes genealogies c. there was a truth or an errour upon one of the sides as there is a right and a wrong in every contradiction of such a kind yet the Apostle thinketh fitter for the Churches peace that such be altogether refrained rather than any way at least in publick insisted upon or decided 3. Because no Minister can bring forth every truth at all times he must then make choice And I suppose some Ministers may die and all do so who have not preached every truth even which they knew unto the people Beside there are no question many truths hid to the most learned Neither can this be thought inconsistent with a Ministers fidelity who is to reveal the whole counsel of God because that counsel is to be understood of things necessary to mens salvation and is not to be extended to all things whatsoever for we find the great Apostle expounding this in that same Sermon Act. 20. ver 20. I have keeped back nothing that was profitable unto you which evidenceth that the whole counsel of God or the things which he shewed unto them is the whole and all that was profitable for them and that for no by-respect or fear whatsoever he shunned to reveal that unto them Also it is clear that there are many truths which are not decided by any judiciall act and amongst other things sparingnesse to decide truths that are not fundamentall judicially hath been ever thought no little mean of the Churches peace as the contrary hath been of division The third way which is the second sort of the former of composure is mixed When there is some medling with such questions yet with such forbearance that though there be a seen difference yet there is no schism or division but that is seriously and tenderly prevented as upon the one side some may expresse their mind in preaching and writing on a particular question one way others may do it differently yet both with that meeknesse and respect to those they differ from that it doth beget no rent nor give just ground of offence nor mar union in any other thing Or it may possibly come to be decided in a Synod yet with such forbearance upon both sides that it may prove no prejudice to union those who have authority for them not pressing it to the prejudice of the opinion names consciences of the other or to their detriment in any respect but allowing to them a liberty to speak their minds and walk according to their own light in such particulars And on the contrary the other resting satisfied in the unity of the Church without condemning them or pressing them to condemn themselves because so indeed their liberty is no lesse than others who have the decision of a Synod for them And thus men may keep communion and union in a Church even where by the Judicatories thereof some lesser not fundamental errour which doth also infer unwarrantaable practices is authoritatively concluded We have a famous instance of this in the Church of Africa in the dayes of Cyprian which by the Ancients hath ever been so much esteemed of There was a difference in that Church concerning the Rebaptizing of Hereticks and Schismaticks after their conversion or of such as had once fallen in to them Cyprian and the greatest part thought their first Baptism null or by their fall made void others thought it not so who were the lesser part yet right as to this particular There was meetings on both sides for defence of their opinions Also in a Council of near three hundred Bishops it is judicially and authoritatively concluded yet that Synod carried so as they did not only not censure any that dissented nor presse them to conform in practice to their judgment but did also entertain most intimat respect to them and familiarity with them as may be gathered from what was formerly hinted And upon the other side we do not find any in that Church making a schism upon the account of that judicial erroneous decision though at least by three several Synods it was ratified but contenting themselves to have their consciences free by retaining their own judgement and following their own practice till time gave more light and more occasion to clear that truth And we will never find in the
Writings of any time more affection amongst brethren and more respect to peace than was in that Church at that time amongst those that differed And there is not any practice more commended in all the Church-history and Writings of the Fathers than this practice as partly may be gathered from what was formerly touched out of Augustine And if we will consider the case rationally we will find that it is not impossible to have union in a Church where there is in such a difference an authoritative decision even supposing that side on which the errour lyes to be approved For 1. There is no necessity for such as have authority for them to presse others in their judgment or practice in such things neither can it be thought that such a decision can of it self satisfie all scruples neither yet that men doubtingly may follow Nor lastly that such controversies can bear the weight of troubling the Church by censuring such as otherwayes may be faithfull seing sometimes even unfaithfull men have been spared with respect to the Churches good as hath been said And secondly upon the other side such a constitution of a Church doth not involve all that keep communion therein in the guilt thereof if personally they be free as in the instance of the Jewish Church is clear where no question many corrupt acts have been established yet did it neither make communion in Worship or Government to be unlawfull where the matter and manner of carriage was lawfull Beside this would infer that no Judicatory could keep union where there were contrary votes or a Sentence past without unanimity because that is certainly wrong to them who think otherwayes and if so there could be no Judicatory expected either in Church or State for it cannot be expected that they shall be still unanimous or that the greater part shall cede to the lesser and rescind their own act Also suppose there should be such a division upon one difference can it be expected that those who unite upon the divided sides respectively shall again have no more difference amongst themselves and if they have shall there not be a new division and where shall this end And seing men must resolve to keep unity where there are faults of such a nature or to have none at all it is as good to keep it at first as to be necessitated thereto afterward The Orthodox urge this argument against the Donatists who would not keep union with them because of pretended corruptions in the proceedings of Judicatories and Ordinations yet were constrained to bear with such amongst themselves and particularly to receive and unite with the Maximinianists whose communion they had once rejected though a branch of their own faction because they saw no end of divisions if they did not resolve to dispense with such things amongst themselves And Augustine often asserteth that they were never able to answer this argument when it was propounded to them to wit Why they did not give them that same latitude in keeping communion with them which they had given to the Maximinianists who were guilty of such things as they imputed to them We conceive then that even in such a case there may be union for prosecuting the main work of the Gospel notwithstanding of such a circumstantial difference if men otherwayes set themselves to it and the generall grounds formerly laid down do confirm this CHAP. XII What to do for union in points not doctrinall but about matters of fact or personall faults IF the difference be not doctrinall in point of judgment at least only but being in matter of fact as personall faults and corruptions whereby the one is ready to object to the other some bypast failings and miscarriages whereupon by inconsiderat upbraidings pressing of Censures or condemnation of what hath been done the Churches peace is in hazard to be broken and men like to be rent and divided in their communion And oftentimes such things prove exceeding fashious where men wilfully or imprudently pursue such things without respect to the Churches peace This often waited upon a time of darknesse or persecution when men being in the dark and in a distemper were led away by tentation and overtaken with many faults and sometimes amongst others made to juffle with and trample one upon another as it were not knowing what they were doing and when this time was over some were ready to carp at what was past in the dark and to quarrell at others for such juffling when they were so through-other This indeed was ordinary but most unbecoming grave men to make that a ground of contending which inadvertently was done by others in the dark as the great Basilius saith In nocturno tempore densis tenebris Such contests are of four sorts First Sometimes in generall there is a dissatisfaction with the constitution of the Church in respect of the grossenesse of the Officers and Members thereof This cannot be removed upon the one side only because tares cannot but be in the Church and that discernably as Cyprian saith it is removed then by meeknesse and tendernesse upon the one side towards such as have withdrawn and by their yeelding to return who have withdrawn which when it came to passe hath been matter of gladnesse to all the Church Amongst Cyprians Epistles Epist. 50. edit Pameli mention is made of Urbanus Maximus and others of the Church of Rome who being Confessors and imprisoned in the time of persecution and after their delivery finding many grosse Members to be in the Church and meeting with the doctrine of Novatus that commended separation to the godly for their more comfortable communion together that they came to be tickled therewith and for a time to separate from the communion of Cornelius and others of the Clergy pretending there could be no communion in such an evil constituted Church but afterward finding the great hurt that came thereby to the Church they overcame their own affections and inclinations and out of respect to the good of the Church did unit which was exceedingly welcomed by all as their Epistle to Cyprian and his to them do manifest And as their fall sheweth that it is not impossible but that zealous Ministers who have keeped out against defection may be overtaken with such a fault So it giveth a sweet copie of Christian deniednesse and tendernesse by others to be followed in the like case Their words to Cyprian are worthy the observing Nos habito consilio utilitatibus Ecclesiae paci magis consulentes omnibus rebus praetermissâ—…s Iudicio Dei servatis cum Cornelio Episcopo nostro pariter cum universo Clero pacem fecisse cum gaudio etiam universae Ecclesiae prona etiam omnium charitate A second sort of such contests are When faults are alleaged which either are not true or cannot be proven although possibly they may be both grosse and true for both of these did the Novatians and Donatists trouble
according to its own intrinsick grounds and warrant And we conceive that it is not suitable to the Authority of Christ's Ordinances and the nature of His Courts that either the removing or standing of such a legall formality should be rigidly pressed and it maketh proceedings in Christ's Courts to be involved in too many subtilties that are used in humane Laws And also supposing that a corrupt constitution may be without such a formal Protestation it seems to give too much advantage thereto as if there were lesse accesse afterward to condemn the same And upon the other side supposing that a lawfully constituted Synod should be declined as the Synod of Dort was lately by the Arminian Remonstrants the pressing too vehemently of the removing thereof doth suppose some way the constitution to be lesse valid if such a thing should stand This is only to be understood in the case presupposed to wit Where the question is not about the authority of Synods simply but of this or that constitution of a particular Synod the first indeed that is the questioning of Synodical Authority hath been thought intolerable in all times because it strake at the root of Church-government and Order without which the Church cannot subsist But the second which acknowledgeth the same Government in general and Rules of Constitution and professeth respect to that same Authority is indeed not so intolerable because it doth suppone still the Church to have power and the exercise thereof to be necessary Hence we will find that in the primitive times they did utterly condemn appellations from Synods simply that is the betaking them to another Judge as more proper than or superiour unto such Synods and there are severall Canons in the Councils of Africk that threaten Excommunication to such as decline their Authority and appeal to Rome or any forreign power as a superiour Judge Yet we will find that the Councils do allow Appeals from a lesser number to a greater or from particular Councils to a general Yea from their own particular Synods to a more general hearing of others in the Province yea they allow even adjacent Provinces to be appealed to in case corruptions should be in one particular Province This was enacted in the Council of Sardica and Bishops are requested by severall Canons not to think this derogatory from their authority because this did consist well with respect to Church-authority and Government in it self but tended only to prevent or remedy exorbitances and abuse therein which of it self if it be not abused is not ill CHAP. XIV What is to be done in order to union about divisions concerning doctrinall determinations THe Question may be concerning the matter enacted by some Synod even when there is no exception against the constitution thereof that is when the matter approven by it is unfound or when a truth is condemned at least it is judged to be so We are not here speaking of such matter as is fundamentall but such as is consistent with soundnesse of judgement in the main and piety in these who may be upon either side Such as were these debates concerning the rebaptizing of Hereticks and Schismaticks or for the admitting them unto the Church by confirmation only and questions of that nature which may fall to be amongst orthodox men I suppose it were good that judicial decisions of such things were not multiplied yet upon supposition that they are past somewhat would be said Such determinations are of two sorts First Some are meerly doctrinall and of this kind are such questions as are concerning the object of Predestination order of Gods Decrees and such like and others it may be which are of lesser concernment than these These being meerly doctrinal and inferring no diversity in practice or Worship there is the easier accesse to union notwithstanding of such respect being had to the mutuall forbearance mentioned so that none be constrained to acknowledge what is enacted by vertue of such a decision because such a determination in matter of Doctrine is but ministeriall and declarative And therefore as one man may forbear another to speak his own mind in some things that differ from his and it may be from truth also and not instantly divide from him or much contend with him So ought he to bear with a Synod and not to divide from them upon that account he having accesse so to declare his own mind and the reasons thereof and otherwayes to carry himself as may keep him free of that apprehended guiltinesse and so a Synod ought to bear with some particular men that differ But by adding the second kind there will be ground to speak more The second kind is of such determinations as have not only a doctrinall decision but also some practicall consequents following thereupon which we may again distinguish these wayes 1. They are either such consequents and practices as infer a division and opposition or a diversity only some consequents infer a division or separation As suppose a Church-Synod should enact that no persons should keep communion with such as they judge not to be godly nor joyn in Ordinances nor so much as sit down with them Or that no persons thinking otherwayes might lawfully be ordained Ministers or admitted to that office as sometimes appeareth hath been determined in very numerous Synods of the Donatists Indeed the standing of such Sentences in force and having execution accordingly following them are such as there can be no union had upon such tearms Again some practices imply no division in Worship or Government but only something which possibly is in it self unwarrantable as that Act of rebaptizing was which was determined and enacted by severall Councils in Africk which kind of determination may be considered either as peremptory and exclusive that is allowing none to do otherwayes or to be admitted to Ministery and Ordinances which should not engage to do so Or moderated so as though it held forth such a determination concerning the fact yet doth not peremptorily presse others beyond their own light Of the first sort were the peremptory Acts of the West-church concerning Easter holy dayes and other ceremonies Of the last were these Acts of the Council of Africk concerning the rebaptizing of Schismaticks wherein none were pressed beyond thir own judgement Again such consequents and practices that follow Church-determinations may either be presently necessary to be practised and dayly practicall as suppose a Church should make constitutions for administration of Baptism and the Lords Supper by mixing in with the essentials thereof such and such corrupt ceremonies and additions Or they may be such practices as are only supposable and possible but it may be exceeding improbable-like at least for the future that there shall be occasion to put them in actuall exercise though it may be there was some present exigent giving occasion to such a determination which possibly may never recur As suppose a Church should determine that a
converted Iew or Turk should not be baptized in the manner that others are baptized but some other way it may be there was some Iew or Turk to be baptized when that determination passed but that particular Act being by there is no probability that ever there may be accesse to put the same in practice again although it be not simply impossible Now there is great odds betwixt these two and in effect this last case doth look liker a doctrinall determation when the occasion thereof is past than any way to be practicall Further we may distinguish these also in such practices that are positively enacted to be practised by an authoritative Act ordaining in such possible cases that it be so done that is when such a case occurreth men should be astricted to follow the same and Ministers should accordingly act Or they are such cases as do not ordain any practice to be done but do declare such a thing to be lawfull As suppose they should declare a Minister might lawfully baptize a Iew so as is formerly said without any peremptory ordaining of the same which is still rather a doctrinall decision than a positive ordinance We may yet add one distinction more which is this determination is either to declare such a thing lawful to Church-men in some Ecclesiastick matter as suppose as was sometimes in the primitive persecutions upon some Querie from some Ministers it should be enacted that in such and such cases Ministers might flie sell the Church-goods or use such and such shifts and means for their escape and deliverance as others it may be would think unlawfull Or it is when the practising of the supposed case belongs to Magistrates or men in civil stations as suppose upon some Queries from Magistrates or others enquiring if it were lawfull to admit Iews to dwell in such and such places meerly for civil traffick or if they might eat and drink with an Ambassador of the Cham of Tartaria or help Chinas against the Tartars or such cases which possibly beside the occasion of the Querie might never occur now supposing the case to be decided affirmatively by a Church-judicatory and a rent to have followed thereupon and to continue after the case is not probably practicall because of the former decision and so in the rest of the former suppositions it is to be enquired If and How union may be win at in them respectively Now these distinctions being premitted we come to consider accordingly How union may be made up where division standeth upon such accounts In reference to all which in the general we say That peremptorinesse and self-willednesse being excluded which are expresly prohibited to be in a Minister it is not impossible to attain union amongst faithfull sober and orthodox men who will acknowledge that mutuall condescending and forbearance is necessary which by going through the particular steps will appear wherein we may relate to the former generall grounds laid down and be the shorter in instances and reasons because this draweth out in length beyond our purpose and also because Verbum sapienti satis est and these especially that are concerned in this need not by us either to be instructed or perswaded to their duty many of whom the Lord hath eminently made use of to teach convince and perswade others We shall only as in all the rest offer some things to their view which may occasion the remembering of what they know and the awakening of the zeal and affection that they have to act accordingly To come then to the first sort of determinations which are doctrinall it may appear from what is said that there can be no just ground of division upon that account for in such things a Church may forbear particular persons and again particular persons may forbear a Church It is not to be thought that all orthodox Divines are of the same mind in all things that are decreed in the Synod of Dort particularly in reference to the object of predestination yet the Synod hath not made any division by Censuring of such neither these who differ from that determination have broken off communion with the Church but have keeped communion and union in the Church hath not been thereby interrupted yet these who apprehend themselves to be right cannot but think the other is in an errour and if this forbearance be not allowed there can never be union in the Church except we should think that they behoved all to be in the same mind about such things and that there should never be a decision in a Church but when there is absolute harmony for supposing the plurality to decide right yet these whose judgement were condemned were obliged according to their light to divide seing they are in their own judgments right It is true I suppose that it is not simply unlawful or hurtful to truth for a Church-judicatory out of respect to peace in the Church to condescend abstractly to wave a ministeriall decision without wronging of the matter As suppose these in Africk for peace had waved their judiciall decision of the necessity of rebaptizing in such a case or these who determined the contrary might have waved theirs yet neither of them had hurt their own opinion Or suppose that in the decisions that were concerning Easter upon both sides of the controversie either had past from their decisions and left the matter in practice to mens arbitrement without any decision I suppose this had not been a wrong to truth supposing it to have been on either side And indeed considering what is written in the History something like this may be gathered For first It is clear that there were determinations on both sides and particularly That the West Church and these that joyned with them did determine the Lords Day necessarily to be keeped for distinguishing them from the Iews 2. It is also clear That Policrates with many Bishops in Asia did judicially condemn that deed appointing the fourteenth day of the month to be keeped So that necessarily both decisions could not stand And 3. this is clear also That the way that was taken to settle that difference so stated was That judiciall decisions should be waved and men left to their own arbitrement to observe what day they thought good whether in the East or West Church whereupon followed an union and Policarpus did communicate with Anicetus at Rome upon these tearms Ut neuter eorum sententiam suam urgeret aut defenderet as the Centariators have it out of Ireneus that is that neither of them should urge or defend their own opinion and upon this there followed peace notwithstanding of that difference It brake up again more strongly in the time of Victor and although Ireneus was of his judgment yet did he vehemently presse him not to trouble the Church by pursuing such a determination and did exceeding weightily expostulat with him for it He wrote also to the other party that both of them might
forbear the pressing of such decisions and that the thing might be left to mens arbitrement without prejudice to the Churches union as formerly it had been used this is clear from Church-history and that word of Sozomen lib. 7. cap. 19. is weighty Frivolum enim quidem merito judicarunt consuetudinis gratia à se mutuo segregari eos qui in praecipuis religionis capitibus consentirent that is They judged it and upon good ground most frivolous for men to be separated or divided one from another because of a custome who did agree together in the main points of Religion And though this matter be of it self no controversie decided in the Word at least as it was stated yet considering their thoughts of it and the grounds which they alleage for it it was not so to them and that peremptorines of Victors who afterward would not be reclaimed from that second determination is condemned by all as being the ground of that following schism And indeed in such cases where two parts of a Church are divided having independent authorities as to one another and there being contrary determinations in the same question it seemeth convenient and necessary for peace that either both should wave their decisions or that both should permit the decisions of each other to stand and be in force to such only as should acquiesce therein and willingly acknowledge the same Again where there is nothing like a party or equality but the division is in the same one Church betwixt a greater and smaller number and the greater will not be induced to remove their determination It is no way sinfull to the lesser to joyn with them notwithstanding thereof they having their own freedom and liberty cautioned as was formerly said Yea this seemeth not unexpedient that they should do for the good of the Church 1. Because it is not so readily to be expected that men who have such an advantage will cede to these who have it not 2. It may have inconveniencies if a smaller dissenting number should necessitat a Church to wave former determined truths though possibly not fundamental because of their dissatisfaction therewith who esteem them not to be truths and strengthen others in a schism as if they could not keep union and communion with a Church where any thing contrary their mind were determined Also 3. it seemeth most agreeable to reason that in sinlesse cedings the lesser number should cede to the greater And 4. because by so doing this accidental confirmation of an opinion by having the plurality of a Church or Synod for it is left open to the other side when they may be the plurality Hence we see generally that the minor part cedeth to the greater if the not pressing of the removal of such a decision be a ceding yea even when the plurality were wrong as in that case of Africk these who differed did not presse the rescinding of that determination having their own liberty Nor did these that had the plurality then for them impose any bond to keep the other from rescinding their determinations if they should come to be in such a capacity but both keeped peace for the time and afterwards in the dayes of Augustine we will find Councels of the Church of Africk determining the just contrary concerning that case of Baptizing and yet still entertaining peace and communion amongst themselves although the authoritative decision stood alwayes upon the side of the plurality CHAP. XV. What shall be done in order to union about such decisions as have practical consequents following thereon TO come to the second case to wit anent such decisions as have some practicall consequents following thereupon For the more short answering we shall lay down these Assertions Assert 1. In such practices as are opposit and infer division in the cases mentioned there can be no union or communion expected as we see in all the cases where such have been practised as of the Novatians Donatists and such like there may be more or lesse heat and bitternesse betwixt men that differ so but there cannot be union because such determinations and practices do draw a line and build a wall of separation betwixt the one and the other and so makes one side to be accounted as not of the same body Assert 2. Where the consequents only infer some difference or are not peremptorily pressed they do not infer necessarily a division as we see in the cases of Africk and others mentioned and Sozomen in the chapter cited giveth many instances of diversities of this kind in Churches without any breach of communion and saith it is necessary because Neque easdem traditiones per omnia similes in omnibus Ecclesus quamvis in omnibus consentiant reperire possis that is Ye will hardly find the same traditions alike in all things in all the Churches even though they agree in all things that are material And upon the matter such determinations are but indeed as if they were doctrinall to such as acknowledge them not and men are accordingly to walk in them Assert 3. In such practices as are daily practicable in respect of the occasions thereof union is more difficult though not impossible than in such cases where the occasion of practice is not probable because there being no present occasion to practise the same it looketh most unwise like to bring in or keep in a more certain and greater evil in the Church for eschewing of what folks may never be put to and suppose the case to be past that may probably never recurre it is more for the Churches good by abstaining the approbation of such an act and by not being involved in the apprehended guilt thereof to make up again the communion of the Church for the preventing of a greater hurt because that continueth to be a duty and is necessary to edification and the thing being past ought not to be the occasion of a present and following division as was formerly said If it be said How can there be union in such a case upon the principle supposed till as may be said by one side those who have decided and acted corruptly should repent and as may be said by the other till those who have divided unjustly from the Church and wronged the authority thereof should acknowledge their offence without which there cannot be union For answer to which we say 1. What if neither party shall ever be brought to repent or acknowledge an offence shall the Church in such a case never attain to union Repentance implyeth a conviction and this implyeth information and clearness in the judgment that such a thing is wrong Now it being often seen that it is impossible to get men of one judgment concerning such a thing Must therefore union be impossible till men be of one judgment This hath been formerly disproved 2. What if this had been the mind of the Churches and Servants of God from the
and People for remedying of such an evil in the Church but being keeped so long on the former we cannot enter on this We shall only lay down these few generals 1. That neither of them ought to be offended or stumbled at such divisions or thereby be brought to have lesse esteem either of the Gospel the Ordinance of Government or Worship or the Ministery and Ministers of Jesus Christ much lesse would there be insulting over or advantage taken against these upon this occasion as is recorded to the infamy of several persons but on the contrary all would be affected therewith as with a most dangerous snare and fearfull plague And to this purpose Augustine doth seriously presse his Boniface Governour of Africk that he should not stumble at the divisions of the Church and particularly Epist. 50. 2. All would search if they have had any sinfull influence upon the procuring of such a stroke for if it be a plague and wo to them they would look back to the rise thereof who knows but the sins of Magistrates or People in their fretting at the Ordinance of Government despising of the Ministery not receiving of the Word nor walking answerably therto and such like may have procured this division from the Lord as a judicial stroke on them to harden them in their former sin and thereby to strengthen their tentation to despise all the Ordinances more to their own ruin as may be gathered from what hath been formerly spoken 3. All would be carefull to abstain from what may further or heighten the breach and by all means endeavour not to be engaged in such sidings for that often encourageth others and encreaseth and fixeth a rent and in experience it is seen that these schisms were ever most dangerous and most difficultly removed wherein people came to party and side with opposit sides in the division and seing the Spirit in the Scripture doth forbid people as well as Ministers to divide this must be their duty not to joyn in such a division Also it unfits them to get good from Ministers or to do good for removing of a rent amongst them And we are sure If doubtfull disputations vain janglings and such like questions that tend not to edification be to be eschewed by people then we conceive that such as are in the cases presupposed may be so esteemed of 4. They are by all respective means seriously to presse the abstaining from and composing of such differences by their serious representations of the ills thereof and exhortations according to their places to have the same remedyed And were this more amongst people upon occasions in due manner to testifie their sober resentment of such evils in the general and desire of union and condescendency for attaining the same so far as is fit it would much more become the sobriety of tender Christians and be much more effectual for this end than to be heightening and aggreging the miscarriage of any one party to another or carrying reports or informations true or false which may kindle humours to a flame that are hot and smoaking already It would affect a heart to hear the regraits and expostulations that Constantine Gratian and others have anent the divisions of Church-men in their times and their exhortations to remedy the same 5. All sorts would endeavour to be in good tearms with God in respect of their own particular conditions and when all faileth they would still be instantly dealing with God by prayer for healing of the same as accounting it a great plague even to them while this continueth CHAP. XXI The grounds and motives of the desired union THe last thing proposed to be spoken to was the grounds whereby union on such like tearms in such cases might be pressed but seing somethings to this purpose have been already here and there inserted upon severall occasions and seing these who are mainly concerned in this are supposed to be most tenderly zealous of the Churches good and so not to stand much in need of many motives to perswade to this which doth so nearly concern the same and fearing to heap up too many words in a matter so clear we shall forbear to insist and only propose some considerations to the conscience of the tender Reader especially in reference to some particular circumstances which sometimes may occur in the case of division And let God Himself who is the God of peace of love and of order put them home to consciences with a strong hand First The consciencious Reader may consider when all is well weighed that is formerly proposed with what may besides occur to himself If the study of union be not a most necessary thing and if without the essaying of these and such like means according to his interest and calling he can have peace as being sufficiently exonered in his duty in reference to this great end and if there can be solid quietnesse to continue division upon the grounds mentioned and to sleight the pursuing after union if attainable upon these or such like tearms as are proposed especially in these and such other cases 1. When a Church is under externall crosses and afflictions and by Gods dispensation is cast into the furnace to be therein strugling and wrestling one with another and as if it were in the time of the Churches greatest peace and calm to be contending for matters of such concernment O how unsuitable is it Though indeed condescending be called-for at any time yet certainly much more and in an especiall manner at such a time The judicious and great Divine Calvin doth upon this account exceedingly aggrege the divisions amongst some English in Frankford who being banished in the dayes of Queen Mary for the same Religion did even there contend for matters of little moment This saith he Epist. 200. was exceeding intempestivâ—… or untimous and exceeding offensive to the Church of Christ and unbecoming their case And although he utterly disapproved these ceremonies as unbecoming the Church of Christ Yet doth he Epist. 206. presse moderation on both sides using these words Sicuti autem eos qui à vobis dissentiebant hortatus sum ut qua possent moderatione inflecterent ita mihi displicuit nihil vicissima parte vestra recedi vel remitti that is As I did exhort these who were not of one mind with you to stretch themselves with all possible moderation So it did displease me that there was upon the other hand by you nothing ceded or remitted The second case is When a Church by division is laid open to grosse hereticks who wait the occasion of such a division that they may make as it were an infall upon her Division should be shunned at any time but in such a case union should be at any rate of warrantable condescendency purchased In that difference between Eusebius and Basilius at first it was sufficient to eschew division for which end at Nazianzens desire Basilius removed but when the Arians were like
to take advantage thereof he did again return and by his condescending made up a perfect union thereby to stop the door against the in-breaking of errour upon that people Which fact is ever highly commended even in respect of the seasosonablnesse thereof in reference to that tentation 3. A third case wherein union would especially be studied is When there is little help from without to the sustaining of the Government and order of the Church but men in that respect have and take liberty to act as they will because then union is the only wall and if that fall there is nothing to guard Hence it is that necessity especially in such a case hath made men think upon associations and mutuall bonds for the establishing and confirming of union 4. It is when some of the Ordinances especially the Ordinance of Government is questioned or when they are despised and someway made contemptible before men in such cases for respect to the Ordinances of Christ men ought to condescend to the uttermost and to endeavour the recovery of the Ordinances of Christ to their former beauty which is impossible to be attained without this because division maketh all to appear contemptible 5. It is when there seemeth to be some speciall nick or choak or crisis to speak so that is When if there be not present uniting and gripping in all probability the division and breach will grow greater and wider and be more difficultly removable In such a case men ought to stretch themselves with all the moderation that is possible as Calvins expression is if they may now at least through Gods good hand upon them come to some agreement and taking grip to say so while it is possible And if each of these alone strongly presse the study of union even beyond what is ordinary O how very strongly will all of them put together presse it And how actively should men zealous for God and His precious Ordinances and tender of the edification of souls bestir themselves to follow after peace in such a vehemently urging case The second thing that would be seriously considered and thought upon is What is the possibility and feasablenesse and accesse to attainment of such a desirable end It is true tenaciousnesse in some may make union in the least things impossible especially such as may by his grace gifts esteem or the dependance of others upon him because of these have some speciall stroke and influence upon the thing But the Reader would consider 1. If someway the stick be not at himself and if there be not something possible to him in reference to union which yet he hath not condescended to for although he hath not power over the wills of others yet hath he over his own 2. Let him consider If the ills that follow division be not great and certain and if so if the stopping at any step of the condescending called-for will bear out the conscience against the cryes of so many reproaches that are casten upon Ordinances by some against the many challenges that will arise upon the miscarriages of others that are occasioned by such divisions and against the impression that the weighting and sadning of many honest hearts will have with it one day And if he dare step in to judgment without fear of being found faulty in any measure in respect of the forementioned inconveniencies if his condescending as is called-for might have prevented them 3. He would consider if at the appearing of Jesus Christ when all such affections shall be laid by and disputings will not have place nor recriminations be admitted if I say in such a case he may not have more peace in condescending upon either side as is proposed for the good of the Church than by refusing the same to keep up the division 4. It would be seriously pondered whether union by such condescendency or division without it may be most profitable and edifying to the Church and if any of these things be of such consequence as to stand in the way of the Churches further edification 5. The Reader may consider if ever in the practice of the primitive times or in the writings of orthodox and sober Divines old or late any so circumstantiated division will be found warrantable or if out of the heat of debate they would probably have stuck at any condescension that is here required upon either hand 6. It may be considered If all the present reformed Churches being appealed unto in such a case were singly and impartially to give judgement thereanent whether it could upon any ground be thought that they would judge such condescending unlawfull upon either side if by it and no otherwayes union were to be attained 7. It would be considered That if all that ever have written on this subject of old or late were consulted that for ought I know it will be found that the condescension that they allow for attaining and preserving of union in the Church will be of a larger extent than any thing in this case required And I suppose hardly will it be found that from such writings there will be a sticking allowed upon any such thing as is proposed And will it be safe at once to condemn so many 8. The Reader may reflect on himself and try what are his thoughts of former divisions and if he doth not approve most ordinarily these that were most peaceable and alwayes these that in such a circumstantiated case did study condescendency and if he doth not within himself judge that it had been more for the Churches good that such divisions had been removed upon such like tearms than that they should have been continued and if there be not in his bosome a kind of indignation at the rigid drivers of such a division whereby he may know and discern what is fit to be done in the present case if he were as impartiall in it as in the other 9. He may consider If union be not made up upon such or the like tearms and if upon other tearms it be impossible What will follow or what usually doth follow in such cases Doth not bitternesse grow to a height amongst orthodox men as if each of them were enemies to the truth of Christ and enemies to one anothers persons names also are often imposed upon each by the other as if they were not both of the same body or as if it were good service to God and advantage to the Truth by such designations to render one another odious contemptible and uselesse As these that refused to joyn with the Church of Rome in Easter were called Quartodecimani whereupon followeth abstinence in communion with one another turning aside unto errour and novelty amongst some indulgence if not connivance at and compliance with grosse and corrupt men amongst others coldnesse in zeal to God and love one to another and upsitting in the power and practice of godlinesse amongst all and many such like wofull effects And shall alas shall the